By the Court.—Heard Shri S.S. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Kant, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 and 5.

2. All the above writ petitions raise similar questions of facts and questions of laws, which have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. In writ petition No. 15015 of 2014 the following prayers have been made by the petitioner. :

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notification dated 17.7.1997 and 23.12.2004 under Section 28 and 32 respectively of the Act No. 1 of 1966 in respect of Araji Khasra No. 681 measuring area of 4050 hectare, Araji Khasra No. 683M area 0.3520 hectare, Araji Khasra No. 683M area 0.3520 hectare, Araji Khasra No. 685M measuring area 0.0890 hectare situated at village Brahmpur, alias Bhopura Pargana Loni, Tehsil and District Ghaziabad.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of quashing the award dated 30.12.2013 issued by respondent No. 4.

(iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to exempt the aforesaid land of the petitioners from acquisition proceeding.

(iv) Issue any other writ order of direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(v) Award the costs of the writ petition to the petitioners.”

3. Brief facts giving rise to the petitions are; that Notification under Section 28 of U.P.Awas Evam Vikas Adhiniyam 1965 was issued on 17.7.1997 and Notification under Section 32 of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Adhiniyam 1965 was issued on 23.12.2004 by which the petitioners land was acquired. There were large number of acquisitions. Certain petitioners had challenged the acquisition. This Court had granted interim order staying dispossession of various other petitioners for which interim order continued till 10.4.13. The award has been declared on 30.12.13. After declaration of the award, the petitioners have come-up in the writ petitions praying for quashing of the Notifications under Section 28 and 32. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the award.

4. Shri S.S. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the Notifications under Section 28 and 32 has submitted that the notifications have lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 2013 Act). He further submitted that the award has not been made within two years and as such, the same has also lapsed. He has relied upon Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

5. Shri Sri Kant, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner cannot be allowed to challenge the Notification under Section 32 after lapse of more than 9 years. He submits that so far as prayer for quashing the award dated 30.12.2013 is concerned, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the award he may make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. He submits that Section 11A is not applicable in the Acquisition under the Awas Vikas Adhiniyam. Learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Girnar Traders(3) v. State of Maharashtra, (2011)3 SCC 1, whereas Shri Sri Kant placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 28.4.2011 Suraj Pal and others v. U.P. Evam Vikas Parishad and others.

6. Section 24 of Act 2013 provides :

“24(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(a) Where no award under Section 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or

(b) Where an award under said Section 11 has been made, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act,