The main legal point established in the judgment is that employment cannot be claimed as a matter of right under the Land Acquisition Act, and the principles of rehabilitation and preference in employment apply to those affected by land acquisition.

( 1 ) THIS special appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and order of the learned Single judge dated 07/10/2005 by which the writ petition seeking employment in lieu of the land acquired under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called the Act) has been dismissed In view of the judgement of the Full Bench of this Court in Ravindra Kumar v. District Magistrate, Agra and Ors. (2005) 1 UPLBEC 118.

( 2 ) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to the case as narrated by the appellants are that in 1978, notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was Issued in respect of the land measuring 9. 921 Acres including the land of the appellants in Plot No. 23 measuring 0. 13. 3, Plot No. 39 measuring 0. 17. 17 and Plot No, 15/2 measuring 1. 12. 14. The land at that time was owned and possessed by one Sri Swaroop the grand father of appellants. At the time of acquisition of plots, appellants were minor and after attaining the majority they first filed an application on 11/6/2004 claiming compassionate employment in pursuance of the Government Orders dated 15/6/1985 (Annex-2) , 12/5/1988 (Annex-3) , 22/10/1992 (Annex-4) and 29/2/1995 (Annex-5) which provide that in certain cases a member of the family whose land has been acquired can be given employment. As the same was denied, they approached this Court by filing the writ petition in september, 2005 which has been dismissed In view of the aforesaid Full Bench judgment. Hence this appeal,

( 3 ) SHRI S. K. Verma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Siddhartha Varma submitted that the said Government Orders had been Issued for the benefit of those persons, who were deprived of their livelihood by virtue of acquisition of their land under the Act and the said judgment of the Full Bench does not lay down the correct law in view of the fad: that certain arguments particularly, the effectiveness of Government Order issued under Article 162 of the Constitution of India has not been considered therein. He, therefore, submitted that the appeal deserves to be allowed and the judgment and order dated of the learned Single Judge should be set-aside.

( 4 ) ON the contrary, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that Section 4 notification under the Act annexed by the appellants does not reveal that their land situated in two plots i. e. 23 and 39 had been acquired. The land of the appellants was acquired only in Plot No. 15/2 measuring only 1 bigha. The appellants submitted application for the first time in 2004 I. e. after expiry of 26 years. The law of compassionate employment does pot permit entertaining an application at such a belated stage. The Government Orders on which the reliance have been placed by the appellants have not been Issued under Article 162 of the Constitution nor any of them have retrospective effect The first Government Order was issued in 1985, though the land of the appellants were acquired in 1978 and the appeal is devoid of any force and is liable to be dismissed.

( 5 ) WE have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record including the record of the writ petition.

( 6 ) ADMITTEDLY, Section 4 notification as filed by the appellants reveal that the land of the appellants measuring only 1 Bigha was acquired along with the land of large number of persons and appellants have not narrated the correct facts.

( 7 ) THE issue Involved herein is no more res-integrea.

( 8 ) ACQUISITION of the land is one of the modes of sale and purchase of the land under the Act. Acquisitions have been made compulsory, i. e. , against the wishes of the land owners, for public purpose in larger public interest, the provision of providing solatium etc. had been made. Acquisition of land Is also permissible on agreed terms between the parties as provided under the proviso of Section 11 of the Act. Such acquisition would amount to sale by private negotiations as the Award is to be made in the te