R.D. DHANUKA, J.

1. By consent of parties, all three appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order in view of the facts being identical and there being a common order passed by the Reference Court. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding these three appeals are arising out of the reference petition filed under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 are as under:

2. Insofar as First Appeal No.416 of 2000 is concerned, the same is filed against the order passed in Land Reference Application No.40 of 1997 before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Aurangabad. It was the case of the respondent no.1, who was the original claimant that he was the owner and possessor of the land bearing survey no.15 at Garkheda to the extent of 2 Hectares and 49 R equivalent to 6 acres and 6 gunthas. The claimant was the Managing Partner of the “Land Mark Developers. Aurangabad”. It was the case of the claimant that the land in question which was owned by him was forming part and parcel of CIDCO area (New Aurangabad) and was within the local limits of Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad. The land in question was situated abutting Jalna Road in between old Aurangabad city and Chikalthana.

3. In the year 1986, part of survey no.15 came to be acquired for the purpose of development of new Aurangabad city. It is the case of the claimant that at that time the land in question was dropped and was not acquired. The appellant was appointed as Special Planning Authority in respect of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation. The claimant had submitted an application to CIDCO Administration, Aurangabad for approving the lay out for proper and full utilization of the area on 12th October, 1989. After acquisition proceedings of the land in question were dropped in the year 1986-87 in respect of the portion of land bearing survey no.15 of Garkheda, Aurangabad, said lay out plan was not approved by CIDCO by a communication dated 7th December, 1989. The claimant was informed by CIDCO that the acquisition proceedings were already in progress with the Collector, Aurangabad and thus the lay out plan should not be approved.

4. It is the case of the claimant that on 5th December, 1991, actual notification under section 126(4) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short “MRTP Act”) was issued by the District Collector, Aurangabad. It is the case of the claimant that to the North and adjacent to this area is the new High Court building along with its campus, abutting Jalna road, the developed area is known as N-3 and N-4, which is also just adjacent to approximate vicinity and entire area of N-3 and N-4 is fully developed. It is the case of the claimant that the acquired portion of survey no.15 in 1986 is also fully developed consisting of constructed houses. Survey no.16 to the West and survey nos.20 and 22 to the South of survey no.15 are also fully developed where thousands of houses have been constructed. It was the case of the claimant that the entire adjoining area of the land under acquisition has been fully developed, thickly populated and thus nothing remains for the purpose of making any other efforts to develop the acquired area from the land survey no.15 in question.

5. The said notification under section 126(4) of the MRTP Act was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette, Aurangabad Division, Supplement Part-I on 10th December, 1991 and was also published in local newspapers (1) Daily Ajantha, Aurangabad dated 6th January,1992 and (2) Daily Citizen, Aurangabad dated 7th January, 1992. The substance of the above notification was published on site by drawing a panchanama dated 13th February, 1993.

6. The appellant had been appointed as Special Planning Authority for New Aurangabad notified area under section 40(i)(b) of MRTP Act by Government Notification dated 30th October, 1972, amended by Notification dated 3rd February, 1973. CIDCO had carried out survey and prepared a draft plan pro