JUDGMENT :

Hon’ble Kshitij Shailendra, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. Since both the aforesaid writ petitions involve common questions of fact and law, therefore, the same are being decided by a common judgment. For the sake of convenience, Writ-C No.11036 of 2024 (Ram Bhul Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 others) is being treated as the leading case.

3. These two writ petitions have been filed assailing the identical orders dated 18.08.2002 whereby the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Ghaziabad has rejected the applications filed by the petitioners under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) as barred by limitation and also for not being accompanied by certified copy of the order passed in reference proceedings under Section 18 of the Act.

4. The case of the petitioner of Writ-C No.11036 of 2024 (Ram Bhul Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 others) is that his father was a recorded tenure holder of land covered by various Khasaras, details whereof have been mentioned in paragraph no.5 of the said writ petition. The case of petitioner of Writ-C No.11042 of 2024 (Ramda