Markandey Katju, C.J.

1. These writ appeals have been filed against the impugned common judgment dated 16.12.2002.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records.

3. In these appeals, the facts are that the Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act was given on 7.11.1996 whereas the writ petitions were filed on 28.11.1996, i.e. after the award was passed. It has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court that no writ petition should be entertained after the award under the Land Acquisition Act has been passed – vide Tej Kaur and others v. State of Punjab and others , 2003 (4) SCC 485; Municipal Council, Ahmed Nagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, AIR 2000 SC 671; Executive Engineer, Jal Nigam Central Stores Division, Uttar Pradesh v. suresh Nand Jayal, 1997 (9) SCC 224; State of Tamil Nadu v. L. Krishnan and others, 1996 (1) SCC 250. Following the aforesaid decision, we are of the opinion that the writ petition itself were not maintainable and they should have been dismissed on this ground itself. Hence, the writ appeals are dismissed. Connected WAMP Nos.1595 to 1599 of 2005 are closed.