ORDER : 1. These appeals by special leave are directed against the appellate judgment of the SUPREME COURT OF INDIA setting aside the decision of the Single Judge in two independent writ petitions. The learned Single Judge has refused to quash the notification under section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by rejecting the plea that non-simultaneous publication of the notification under section 4(1) in the State Gazette and in the locality had vitiated the acquisition proceedings. The learned Single Judge had also found against the writ petitioners on the ground that their writ petitions have been led more than six years after the acquisition notification under section 4(1) of the Act. In appeal the High Court took the view that the notifications had not been simultaneous and the explanation for Delay in approaching the High Court advanced by the writ petitioners was acceptable. Accordingly Appellate judgment quashed the acquisition. It may be pointed out that the appellate judgment dated August 23. 1988 in Civil Appeal Nos. 5784-85 of 1983. also took the view that dispensing with the hearing under section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act was without any justification particularly when there was no urgency and the acquisition proceedings had not made any progress over a long period of four to five years. 2. So far as the question of non-simultaneous publication of the notifications and the effect of it on the acquisition, there is a direct decision of this Court in the case of Deepak Pahwa & Ors. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors., 1984 (4) SCC 308 This three-Judge Bench decision has taken into consideration the earlier pronouncements of the Court and has held that there is no legal requirement that the notification and the public notice should be simultaneously published. Apart from the fact that they are bound by the judgment, we are of the view that no other opinion can be taken of the legal position. 3. We are not impressed by the stand taken by the writ petitioners that there was justification for their not approaching the court for six years after the section 4(1) notification, when they wanted to challenge the denial of the hearing under section 5-A of the Act and the proceedings itself otherwise. We agree with the learned Single Judge that the explanation not being acceptable, the writ petition has been rightly dismissed. We agree with the learned Single Judge that the explanation not being acceptable, the writ petition has been rightly dismissed. On this analysis the appellate Judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained and the acquisition proceedings have to be revived. 4. When these appeals came up for hearing some time back the Bench hearing the matter has suggested that since two housing societies were interested in the land; it would be appropriate that a settlement is reached between them in regard to the entire area so that housing schemes could be permitted to be undertaken by them. Pursuant to the view expressed by the court, the two societies have filed terms of settlement, which are on record. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh which also has filed independent apeals against the same appellate judgment of the High Court has agreed to accept the terms of settlement and their counsel states that fact to us in Court. 5. While other terms are acceptable, one of the terms regarding the valuation of the land to be determined by Government requires alteration. Learned counsel for the appellant too has agreed to offer at the rate of Rs. 3 Lacs per acre and that term is acceptable to the writ petitioners respondents as also the land owner. In view of the fact the parties have agreed to the said amount of Rs.3 lacs per acre as the value of the land under acquisition, the terms in the settlement for fixation of the compensation shall be substituted by the offer made by Mr. Iyer for the appellant. All parties agree to these terms being altered by us. Mr. Iyer has further agreed that the entire amount of compensation for 9 acres and 1½ gunthas, which under the terms of settlements would be available to the appellants shall be paid at the rate of Rs. 3 lacs per acre (all liabilities included) within three months hence. Failing payment of this amount within the time undertaken, interest at 15% payable on the amount shall be payable. 6. This order shall not be effective until counsel for the State of Andhra Pradesh takes instructions and files a memorandum within a week from today that Government including the Urban Ceiling authorities accept this arrangement. After the State indicates its ratification, the matter shall be placed for further directions on 31st August, 1988 in the Chamber for further directions.