By the Court.—An application for recall of the judgment and order dated 27.11.2007 has been filed by the applicant, Secretary, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Hapur on various grounds and particularly that the applicant was a necessary party though not impleaded in the said writ petition. The Court could not have been directed the State Government to consider the application of the petitioner under Section 48 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter referred to as ‘Act 1894’) in view of the fact that possession of the land has already been taken. Symbolic possession is sufficient and there is no requirement of actual and physical possession of the land be transferred. The application has been heard today. This Court vide judgment and order dated 27.11.2007 has asked the State Government to consider the application of the petitioner filed under Section 48 of the Act, 1894 in the light of the judgments of Supreme Court particularly in Union of India and another v. Bal Ram Singh and another, 1992 Suppl. (2) SCC 136; State of Tamilnadu and another v. Mahalakshmi Ammal and others, (1996) 7 SCC 269; and Sube Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, JT 2001 (6) SC 578 wherein