R. M. S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.

( 1 ) SINCE common questions of law and facts arise in all these petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) IN all these petitions, the petitioners challenge the land acquisition proceedings on two grounds. Firstly that the petitioners were not given personal hearing in the course of the inquiry under section 5a of the Land Acquisition act, 1894, hereinafter called as "the said Act", in spite of the written objections by the petitioners consequent to the publication of notification and service of the copy of the notice under section 4 of the said Act, and secondly that considering the fact that the notification under section 11 of the Maharashtra Resettlement of project Displaced Persons Act, 1976, hereinafter called as "the Resettlement act," was published much prior to the enforcement of Maharashtra Project affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1986, hereinafter called as "the rehabilitation Act, and the ceiling limit which was available under the Schedule a, Part II of the Resettlement Act was 8 acres and therefore, there was no occasion for the authorities to acquire the land of the petitioners a