Judgment : D. S. Sinha, J. 1. Heard Sri H. M. B. Sinha, holding brief of Sri G. N. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P. R. Maurya, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent No. 1 and Sri B. D. Mandhyan, learned counsel appearing for the Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Karvi in district Banda, Seeking impleadment to the petition. 2. THE grievance of the petitioners is that on the strength of notifications dated 2nd June, 1978 and 3rd June, 1978, issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called the Act) published in the Uttar Pradesh Gazette dated 1st July, 1978, the respondents are seeking to acquire plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai, Pargana Karvi, district Banda, and are interfering with their possession over the said plot though the notifications do not include the said plot. On 27th July, 1978 the Court had directed the learned Standing Counsel to file a counter affidavit admitting or denying whether plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai in the district of Banda was sought to be taken over by the Government in pursuance of the notification dated 3rd June, 1978 issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. But, it is unfortunate that even after lapse of a period of more than 17 years the respondent No. 1 has not cared to file the counter affidavit, as directed. 3. THE Court has perused the Uttar Pradesh Gazette, dated 1st July, 1978 produced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. It has been looked by the learned Standing Counsel as well as by Sri B. D. Mandhyan, learned counsel representing the Kris hi Utpadan Mandi Samiti for whose benefit the acquisition is being made. THE notifications dated 2nd June, 1978 and 3rd June, 1978 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act respectively are printed at pages 1517, 1518 and 1519 of the Gazette. 4. A bare perusal of the two notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act, as printed in the Gazette, reveals that the disputed plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai is not included therein. Sr. B. D. Mandhyan, learned counsel appearing for the Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, argues that the disputed plot No. 2611 is covered by the impugned notifications inasmuch as the same is shown, by mistake, in village Bankat. 5. Sr. B. D. Mandhyan, learned counsel appearing for the Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, argues that the disputed plot No. 2611 is covered by the impugned notifications inasmuch as the same is shown, by mistake, in village Bankat. 5. IN the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Krishi Utapadan Mandi Samiti, it is asserted that there was a proposal to acquire the disputed plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai. On the basis of this assertion Sri Mandhyan contends that since there was a proposal to acquire the disputed plot notifications must be read to be in respect of the said plot. 6. MAY be that it was proposed to acquire the disputed plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai, but mere proposal is of no consequence unless it actually culminates into notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. No land can be acquired without following the procedure prescribed by law which in the instant case is the Act. As noticed earlier, no plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai is included in the notifications published in the Uttar Pradesh Gazette dated 1st July, 1978, produced before and perused by the Court. Otherwise also, Annexure CA-1, which is alleged to be the proposal, is not a proposal. It is, in fact, a draft of the proposed notification under Section 6 of the Act, prepared at a stage subsequent to the proposal. 7. THUS, on the material placed before the court it cannot be held that the disputed plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai, Pargana Karvi, district Banda has been duly notified under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act for the purpose of acquisition, and in the absence of notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act covering the said plot the respondents have neither any authority to 'acquire the disputed plot nor they have any right to interfere and intermeddle with the possession of the petitioners over the same. 8. IN the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondents are directed to refrain from either depriving the petitioners of or interfering or intermeddling with their possession over the plot No. 2611 situate in village Kashai, Pargana Karvi, district Banda in any manner. There is no order as to costs. Petition allowed.