By the Court.—Heard Sri N.P. Singh, Advocate, for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondent and Sri Shivam Yadav, Advocate, for New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as “NOIDA”).

2. Petitioners, by means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, have assailed acquisition proceedings commenced with Notification dated 28.1.1994 issued under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1894”) and dated 10.11.1995 issued under Section 6(1) of Act, 1894.

3. It is contended that Notification under Section 6 was issued after expiry of more than one year and hence it was barred by Section 6, first proviso, Clause (ii) which provides that no Notification under Section 6 shall be issued after one year from the date of Notification under Section 4(1) of Act, 1894.

4. Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel appearing for NOIDA, however pointed out that petitioners are subsequent purchasers of disputed land which was acquired by aforesaid Notifications.

5. The dispute relates to the land which is part of Khasra No. 16 in village Sadarpur, Tehsil Dadari, District Gautambudh Nagar. The af