SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.

1. The instant intra-court appeals are directed against two separate orders dated 23.09.2014 passed in W.P.Nos.8171 of 2014 and 8527 of 2014 respectively.

2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant in W.A.No.1462 of 2014 is stated to be the land owner of land bearing S.No.13/3 Part, situated at Village Nazaretpet, Poonamallee Taluk, Tiruvallur District and the appellant in W.A.No.1463 of 2014 is stated to be the purchaser of vacant site to an extent of 4012.50 sq.ft from the appellant in W.A.No.1462 of 2014 (hereinafter they are referred to as first appellant and second appellant).

3. They have filed two separate writ petitions, being W.P.Nos.8171 of 2014 and 8527 of 2014, seeking to quash the notification made in G.O. (Ms.) No.224, Highways and Minor Ports (HN2) Department dated 31.12.2013 published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, dated 29.01.2014 and the notice dated 06.02.2014 of the fourth respondent. The first appellant is a partnership firm engaged in Engineering contractor and R.C.C. Spun pipe manufacturers. On 28.05.2013, a notice under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 (for short “the Act, 2001”) was published for the purpose of acquisition of vast chunk of land, including the aforestated portion of the land owned by the appellants, in Tamil daily “Makkal Kural” and in English Daily “Deccan Chronicle”. The notice dated 31.05.2013 was also issued to the land owner, which was received by the appellants on 10.6.2013. In the said notice, the appellants were called upon to file objections, if any, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the said public notice. It was further stated that if any objection is received within the specified date, the enquiry with regard to the same would be conducted by the District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition), Chennai on 17.6.2013.

4. According to the appellants, the objections were filed on 14.06.2013. The proposed enquiry was not held on 17.06.2013. Thereafter, objections of land owners were sent to the Highways Department. The Highways Department, vide G.O. (Ms.) No.224, dated 31.12.2013, issued a notice under Section 15(1) of the Act, 2001, which was published in the Tamil Nadu Official Government Gazette on 29.01.2014. Being aggrieved, the appellants have preferred the writ petitions, being W.P.Nos.8171 and 8527 of 2014 respectively.

5. The case of appellants before the learned Single Judge was that (i) the impugned notification issued under the provisions of Act, 2001, though dated 31.12.2013, was published only on 29.01.2014 after the Central Act, viz., the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “the Central Act”) came into force with effect from 01.01.2014. As such, the same was illegal as the Land Acquisition Act stood lapsed. Thus, the impugned notification is without jurisdiction and non-existent in the eye of law; (ii) the delegation of power to other than the Collector under the provisions of this Act was not proper; (iii) the procedure as contemplated under Section 15(1) and (2) of the Act, 2001 read with Rule 5 of the Rules, 2003 framed therein, was not properly complied with; (iv) no enquiry was conducted; (v) the objection of the appellants were not properly examined as the appellants had made certain suggestions pointing out alternative proposals to save the acquisition of their lands; (vi) under the provisions of Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, the land owner is entitled to a copy of the report submitted by the Enquiry Committee. The said procedure could have been adopted in these proceedings also; and (vii) the appellants, being the land owners, were entitled to have a copy of the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry committee, which was also not done.

6. The appellants have also raised other grounds before the learned Single Judge, i.e., had proper enquiry been conducted, their land could not have been acqui