P. Sathasivam, J.

1. The appellant in Writ Appeal No.2246 of 2001, is the applicant in the above Review Application.

2. Aggrieved by the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents, the applicant/writ petitioner filed W . P. No.9521 of 1994 before this Court, which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge on 11.07.2001 along with other connected Writ Petitions. The learned Single Judge after finding that the petitioner and other have not approached the Court within the time prescribed, refused to accept their contention and dismissed all the Writ Petitions with liberty to make representation to the concerned authority under Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, ‘the Act’). Aggrieved by the said or der, the applicant preferred Writ Appeal in W.A. No.2246 of 2001. The Writ Appeal came to be disposed of by the Division Bench on 11.08.2006.

3. The main contention before the Division Bench was that neither the petitioner/appellant nor his vendor/erstwhile owner was served with notice for enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. It was pointed out by the respondents even in the counter affidavit filed in the Writ Petition that the writ pet