JUDGMENT In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the acquisition of their land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter referred to as the Act). According to the petitioner, the State Government took some steps with a view to acquire the land of the petitioners. Even though some notification was prepayed u/s 4 of the Act but the same was not published in the official gazette. Reference is being made to the notification Annexure P/1 which is dated 20th May, 1983. It is the case of the petitioners that this notification was never published in the official gazette. The further facts disclosed is that there is a notification u/s 6 of the Act. This is dated 9th of October, 1985. According to the petitioners, this was published in official gazette on 13th December, 1985. The averments made by the petitioner are not very specific and for this an explanation has been given. The explanation is that no concrete material could be collected and these notifications were never published and these remained on the files of the concerned officers. The Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Sheopurkalan, district Morena for whose benefit the acquisition proceedings were taken has filed a return. According to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents it has been stated that a notification was issued on 21st of April, 1973. This was challenged in this Court and ultimately on 31st of January, 1979 vide order Annexure R/2 this Court quashed the notification u/s 6 of the Act After mentioning this fact, it is stated that steps were taken afresh with a view to acquire the land. It is stated that section 4 of notification was prepared on 20th of May 1982 but was published in the Government gazette dated 19th of December, 1985, copy whereof has been placed on the record as Annexure R/2. A perusal of Annexure R/2 indicates that this notification is neither dated nor numbered nor it has shown as to whether this was published in the official gazette or not. There is nothing on record to show that this notification ever formed part of the official gazette. There is an assertion made in Annexure R/3 that some Land has been acquired and this was duly published in the locality. This is said to have been done on 19th of March, 1985. There is nothing on record to show that this notification ever formed part of the official gazette. There is an assertion made in Annexure R/3 that some Land has been acquired and this was duly published in the locality. This is said to have been done on 19th of March, 1985. Annexure R/2 is as vague as other documents placed on the record. It does not indicate as to with regard to which notification some publication was made. All that has been stated in Annexure P/3 is that some publication was made on 19th of April 1985. As noticed above, Annexure R/3, does not indicate regarding which land the publication was done. In para 4 of the petition, it is stated a notification was issued u/s 6. of the Act. This again has not been placed on the record. This is the state of affairs disclosed by respondent No. 1. The return filed by the State is as vague as that of the respondent No. 1. The return of the State indicates some notification u/s 6 (2) was .......... issued. This is said to be dated 9th of October, 1985 and is said to be published in the official gazette of 13th of December, 1985. Again notification u/s 4 of the Act has not been placed on the record. The net result is that there was no notification u/s 4 of the Act and even if it is presumed that there was some notification issued vide Annexure R/1 that will be of no use. Mandatory defect of publication of notification u/s 4 of the Act cannot be cured by issuing a notification u/s. 6 of the Act. In the present case, there is nothing to show that any notification was published. Shri KK Lahoti. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Mandi was unable to point out any such notification. As such, there is no alternative but to hold that the respondents have failed to comply with any of the provisions of law. This writ petition is allowed with costs. The petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the land owned by them. Costs are assessed at Rs. 500/-.