JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Petitioners are knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the acquisition proceedings of the lands in question on several grounds.

2. Learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the Petitioners argues that it has been a settled position of law that if the statutory sanction has not been obtained at the hands of the Government under Sec. 18(3) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976, the acquisition proceedings cannot be sustained; that on the very same ground, relief has been granted to other land owners by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.16827-16834/1994 etc., between YELLAPPA & OTHERS vs. STATE & OTHERS, disposed off on 7/10/1996; if the Scheme has not been implemented within the statutory period, the acquisition would lapse and land should revert to it's owners; the acquisition in question is not in public interest; the BDA has recommended for denotification.

3. After service of notice, the State has entered appearance through the learned AGA; the BDA is represented by its learned Panel Advocate; the Housing Society is represented by its own learned counsel. Both the BDA & the Society have filed their Statements of Objections resisting the Wr