Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) THESE are connected land acquisition appeals which have been preferred by the appellant U.P. Avas Vikas Parishad, Lucknow with the leave of the Court against the judgment, order and award of the reference court enhancing the compensation of the land acquired. The land was acquired for the benefit of the appellant by a notification issued under Section 28 of the U.P. Avas & Vikas Adhiniyam, 1965 which is paramateria to a notification which is issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. The said notification was issued on 19.5.1979. The special land acquisition officer offered compensation to the claimants @ Rs. 29318/- per bigha on the basis of a sale deed dated 20.4.1979 wherein land having an area of 0-2-4 was transferred @ Rs. 39090/- per bigha. The claimants were not satisfied by the market value so offered and, therefore, they preferred separate references wherein the reference court has enhanced the market value to Rs. 32000/- per bigha. This enhancement has been challenged by the appellant in these appeal. Heard Sri Madan Mohan, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri L.P. Singh who appears for some of the claimants in connected appeals and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh who appears for the claimants in one of the appeals. No other counsel for the claimants has appeared even in the second call. On the respective submission of the parties, it is admitted to both the parties that several appeals in connection with the above acquisition and the award as well as the judgment and order of the reference court awarding market value @ Rs. 32000/- per bigha have already been dismissed by this Court. One such judgment of First Appeal No. 378 of 1999 (U.P. Avas & Vikas Parishad Vs. Bhaggan and others) dated 9.9.2008 has been produced and shown to him. Since award of Rs. 32000/- per bigha in respect of acquired land under the scheme has already been upheld in the above appeal which decision has become final and conclusive as per the statement of the parties, I find no reason to deviate from the same. Therefore, the argument of the appellant that there is no proper deduction from the value determined cannot be accepted. Accordingly following the above referred decision dated 9.9.2008, I dismiss all these appeals also for the same reasons as contained therein. Appeals dismissed. No costs.;