(1.) These petitions are heard and disposed of by this common order having regard to the fact that the petitioners are said to be similarly aggrieved by the common acquisition proceedings initiated in respect of their respective lands. Common questions of fact and law arise for consideration and it is hence convenient to consider all the petitions together.
(2.) The brief particulars of the several lands involved in these petitions are shown briefly in tabular form hereunder. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_1329_TLKAR0_2014_1.html</FRM>
(3.) In the above background, before proceeding to consider the several contentions urged by the several petitioners, the effect of the earlier proceedings before this court and the views expressed therein are very pertinent. The learned single judge in dealing with the petition in WP 21920-21922/2011 by his order dated 8.9.2011 has sought to justify addressing the implementation of the PRR Project in its entirety and not merely the propriety of the additional preliminary notification dated 16.8.2010, issued after a final notification was issued in respect of the acquisition proceedings pertaining to Phase - I of the PRR project, in these words: