( 1 ) THE acquisition of the land of Petitioner No. 1 under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act) was challenged in this writ petition on various grou In the light of the subsequent case-law; however, Shri M. S. Vohra, learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his challenge to the acquisition to the following two grounds only, namely:-

(1) The notification dated 24th October 1961 issued under section 4 of the Act was published in the official gazette. But under section 4 (l) of the Act, "the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality". This was not done by the Collector. and (2) The petitioner No. 1 alleged that she was away from Delhi when the notification under section 4 was published. She, therefore, filed objections to the said notification late, namely, on the 2nd of July 1963. A copy of the objection is at Annexure E to the writ petition. In a note at the end of the objection she said that she had no knowledge about the notification under section 4 and that she came to know about it only four days back and, therefore, the delay in f