R.R.K. Trivedi, Markandey Katju, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Both the learned counsel for the parties have agreed that this petition be decided finally at this stage. Facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioners' land was acquired under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act. The petitioners did not file any application for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, on the reference made by the others, the price of the land was enhanced by the award dated 22nd March, 1990. After the award the petitioners made an application under Section 28A of the Act claiming enhanced compensation on the basis of the award given in reference filed by other claimants. The application of the petitioners was rejected by the impugned order dated 10.5.1991 solely on the ground that the land of the petitioners is situated in different village while the reference on which basis the application has been made, was with regard to the land situated in another village. In our opinion, the reason given for rejecting the application was not correct. All the persons whose land were acquired under the same notification were entitled to file an application under Section 28A of the Act. This question has already been determined by this Court in writ petition No. 22033 of 1988 (Sonpati v. State of U.P. and another). Following the judgment in the aforesaid case, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.5.1991 is hereby quashed. The application filed by the petitioners shall stand restored to its original number and shall be considered and decided by the respondent No. 2 within a period of three months from the date a certified copy is filed before him. There will be no order as to costs.;