BABUBHAI KUBERBHAI PATEL Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr. Nikunt Raval learned AGP waives service of rule for the respondents. In the facts and circumstances of the case the petition is taken up for final disposal today. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners, two in number, have made a grievance about the inaction on the part of the respondents in not deciding petitioners' application under Section 28 A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 which was made as far back as on 13. 8. 1999. The petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus to direct respondent no. 1 to decide the said application.

(2.) MR. Nikunt Raval learned AGP appearing for the respondents does not dispute the petitioners' case that the application under Section 28 A of the Act was submitted to respondent no. 1 on 13. 8. 1999 and that the application is still pending for decision.

(3.) IN view of the above, we allow this petition and direct respondent no. 1 to decide the petitioners' pending application under Section 28 A of the Act as expeditiously as possible and in any case by 15. 9. 2009. Direct service is permitted.