1. Rule, with the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith and heard.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the acquisition of their lands for what is known as "Sangamwadi Minor Irrigation Project". The said project when completed will irrigate about 905 hectares of land in the draught prone areas like Ahmedpur, Nilanga, Ausa, Udgir and Chakur of Latur district which have been identified as such for the purposes of the draught prone area programme. The present site wherein the said project is being undertaken has been chosen after carrying out a technical evaluation such as water availability, topography, economic feasibility, the cost of rehabilitation, etc.

3. The challenge to the project has had a chequered history inasmuch as Writ Petition No. 3613of 2000 came to be filed in this Court challenging the said project at the threshold. The said writ petition was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court by order dated 27-9-2000. Thereafter, another Writ Petition No. 4092 of 1999 came to be filed by some of the petitioners abovenamed challenging the administrative approval dated 10-5-1999 granted by the State Government. The said writ petition also came to be dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court observing that "judicial intervention in such matters may not be right".

4. In so far as the order dated 27-9-2000 passed in Writ Petition No. 3613 of 2000, the petitioners therein carried the matter to the Apex Court by way of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 4364 of 2001. The Apex Court considering the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the authorities, disposed of the said Special Leave Petition by its order dated 12-10-2001 with the following observations - The respondents shall not evict the tenure holders without due course of law and also after making further provision of relief and rehabilitation.

5. The instant petition has been filed by 12 petitioners of village Sangamwadi. The acquisition in question has admittedly culminated in the declaration of Award dated 28-6-2006. The petitioners, therefore, are in fact challenging the said Award passed after following the gamut of process as contemplated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short the said Act. A perusal of the averments made in the petition discloses that the said Award has been challenged, inter alia, on the ground that the provisions of Section 5A of the said Act have been breached inasmuch as the objections raised by the petitioners have not been considered and no personal hearing has been granted to the petitioners. The Award is also questioned on the ground that it has not been declared within the time prescribed i.e. a period of two years of the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act.

6. On behalf of the respondents, affidavits have been filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer as well as the acquiring body i.e. the Respondents No.2 and 3 to the petition dealing with the claims and contentions raised in the petition. The affidavit of the Respondents No.2 and 3 also discloses the manner in which the persons who are affected by the project are being rehabilitated.

7. It appears that the petitioners had applied on 30-9-2006 for a certified copy of the Award passed in respect of the lands of the petitioners. The said application was preferred by the Advocate of the petitioners and a certified copy of the same was furnished to the petitioners on 19-10-2006. The copy of the Award furnished to the petitioners is the re-corrected final Award dated 12-10-2006. The said Award dated 12-10-2006 contains the same dates as regards the Section 4 Notification and Section 6 declaration except that there is a variance in the date regarding the publication of the Section 6 declaration in the village. In so far as certified copy of the Award furnished to the petitioners is concerned, the said date as regards public