( 1 ) IN these petitions a challenge has been laid to the acquisition of large tracts of land in Delhi stated to be required for Rohini Residential scheme. The Principal Secretary (PWD/landb), in her Note dated 15. 10. 1999 had requested the Hon. Lt. Governor to approve issuance of a Notification under sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act' ). An order, also invoking the urgency clause was forwarded for the Lt. Governor's signature. On 27th October, 1999 the Lt. Governor , Delhi passed an order in these words - "i have gone through the records and requirements of the Delhi Development Authority and the draft notification prepared by LAC. I am fully satisfied that the land measuring 2673-07 Bigha in village Shahbad, Daulatpur, 2975-09 Bigha in village Pehladpur Banger, 1178-11 bigha in village Khera Kalan, 345-02 Bigha in village Khera Khurd, 1223-06 Bigha in village Pansali, is urgently required for a valid purpose, namely for Rohini residential Scheme under Planned Development of Delh. In view of the urgency of the scheme, I order that notifications under Sections 4, 6 and 17 (1) of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 be issued immediately". The Notification in question inter alia states that - "the Lt. Governor, Delhi is satisfied also that provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the said Act are applicable to this land and is further pleased under sub-section (4) of the said Section to direct that all the provisions of Section 5 (A) shall not apply". Accordingly, the following Notifications/declarations were also issued from time to time: 1]. Notification u/s 4 No. F10 (29)/96/landb/la/11394 dated 27. 10. 1999. Declaration u/s 6 No. F10 (29)/96/landb/la/20 dated 3. 4. 2000. 2]. Notification u/s 4 and 17 No. F (II) (17)/91-Landb/la/6518 dated 28. 4. 1995. Declaration u/s 6 No. F (II) (17)/91-Landb/la/7085 dated 26. 4. 1996 3]. Notification u/s 4 and 17 No. F19 (29)/96-Landb/la/uoi/iii/14-7-2000. 4]. Notification u/s 4 and 17no. F11 (76)/2000/landb/la/dated 25-1-2002. Declaration u/s 6 dated 3-12-2002. All these Notifications/declarations are sought to be quashed in these writ petitions.

( 2 ) THE contention of the Petitioners is that the Lt. Governor had not specifically authorised invocation of Section 17 (4) of the stridently Land acquisition Act and that this is all the more significant since the draft of the notification placed before him adverts to Section 17 (4 ). According to the petitioners, the only inference that can be drawn is that the Lt. Governor did not approve of dispensing with the Petitioners about:blank 21-04-2009 valuable rights to object to the acquisition. The further contention is that since the Petitioners have not been permitted to avail of their rights to file objections under Section 5a and have not been given an opportunity of being heard the entire acquisition should be struck down. It has also been argued on behalf of the Petitioners that even assuming that Section 17 (4) need not in terms have to be mentioned by the Lt. Governor while granting his approval to the Scheme and that reference only to section 17 (1) would suffice, the Lt. Governor has not properly exercised his mind in approving the waiver and withdrawal of the Petitioners valuable right under Section 5a of the Act. In other words it is their stance that resort to the emergency provisions contained in Section 17 of the Act were unwarranted and unjustified in the facts of the present case. It will be relevant to record at the threshold that acquisition proceedings stand completed in respect of an overwhelming portion (stated by Mr. Poddar to be as much as 80 per cent) of the subject land,. e. its possession has been taken over by the Government which has tendered compensation to the erstwhile owners.

( 3 ) THE interplay between the various provisions of the Land acquisition Act with which we are presently concerned have been dealt with in minute detail in a