Judgment 1. The writ petitions are for the issue of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records connected with G.O.Ms.No.123, Education, dated 8.9.1989 issued by the first respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to forbear from taking the land acquisition proceedings against the petitioners. 2. The matter is dealing with the acquisition of land for the purpose of the National High School, Nagapattinam. Learned counsel for the petitioners has raised several grounds attacking the notification issued under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, enquiry under Sec.5 and the declaration under Sec.6 of the Act,. He is fair enough to say that the petitioners have filed applications under Sec.15-A of the Land Acquisition Act on 6.10.1989. It has also been stated by him that petitioners have issued telegram on 27.8.1991 stating that they have already sent to application to the Sub Collector, Nagapattinam to call for the records under Sec.15-A of the Act. The order of the Sub Collector reads thus: "TAMIL" Basing on the above, he has argued that the respondents have not given opportunity to the petitioners. He has contended that the above order is purported to be one under Sec.15-A of the Act. 3. Sec.15-A of the Land Acquisition Act reads thus: “ Power to call for records, etc.: The appropriate Government may at any time before the award is made by the collector under Sec.11 call for any record of any proceedings (whether by way of enquiry or otherwise) for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any finding or order passed or as to the regularity of such proceedings and may pass such order or issue such direction in relation thereto as it may think fit.” As per the provision to Sec.15-A of the Act, the appropriate Government shall not pass or issue any order or direction prejudicial to any person without affording such person a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The order dated 7.10.1991 shows that no reasonable opportunity of hearing had been given to the petitioners. The order dated 7.10.1991 shows that no reasonable opportunity of hearing had been given to the petitioners. In view of the above, it has to be held that when a person files a petition under Sec.15-A of the Act, it is incumbent on the part of the appropriate authority before the award is passed by the Collector under Sec.11 of the Act to call for the records for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality of propriety of any finding or order passed or as to the regularity of such proceedings. In this case the award seems to have been passed on 9.9.1991 i.e., after long time the petition under Sec.15-A has been filed. In view of the above, without going into the merits of the case, I feel it just and proper to direct the respondents to dispose of the application filed under Sec.15-A of the Act by the petitioners herein on 6.10.1989 after hearing the petitioners herein. The petitioners are directed to make a fresh representation along with a copy of the application dated 6.10.1989. The respondents shall pass appropriate orders on the above petition after complying with the provisions of Sec.15-A of the Act as if the application has been filed on 6.10.1989. Till the orders are passed all the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act are stayed. However, it is made clear that the order passed in the writ petitions is not on merits. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders to be passed under Sec.15-A of the Act, leave is granted to the petitioners to agitate the same before the appropriate forum questioning the same. They are permitted to raise all the contentions available to them with reference to the land acquisition proceedings. With the above observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.21614 of 1991 and 27059 of 1995 are closed.