( 1 ) THE short question involved in this Special Leave Petition is whether notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was made within the requisite period of one year from the date of publication of notification under Section 4. Notification under Section 4 was last published on 23/2/1988. There is no dispute between the parties that this is the starting point for limitation. Declaration under Section 6 was signed by the secretary on 22/2/19899 but it was gazetted on 9/3/1989. Now the short question is what is the date of making of this declaration under Section 6. If 22/2/1989 is the date taken for that purpose, it would obviously be within one year from the publication of Section 4 notification. But if the date of making of the declaration of the notification is 9/3/1989 it is obviously beyond one year. There are two judgments of two-Judge benches of this court that have taken the view that mere signing of the notifications under Section 6 by the secretary without gazetting it would not be the relevant date for the purpose of computing period of limitation for issuance of Section 6 notification. These two decisions are rendered in Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti v. Makrand Singh and Eugenio Misquita v. State of Goa. However, our attention was invited to a judgment rendered by four learned Judges of this court reported in Khadim Hussain v. State of U. P. The decision of the bench of four learned Judges of this court seems to have taken a view which is contrary to the views propounded by decisions of two-learned-Judge benches aforesaid. Under these circumstances, we deem it fit to direct that this Special Leave Petition may be placed before a bench of three learned Judges for taking appropriate decision in this connection. The office to place this matter before appropriate larger bench after obtaining orders from Honble the chief justice of India. COURT Master