ORDER 1. These appeals are by the Kanpur Development Authority and the State of Uttar Pradesh aggrieved by the orders dated 26-3-1999 and 6-4-1999. 2. A vast extent of land was proposed to be acquired for the development of new Kanpur city by the Kanpur Development Authority. The respondent landowners approached the High Court challenging the acquisition proceedings in respect of their lands. By the impugned orders, the High Court quashed the notifications issued under Sections 4( 1) and 6( 1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") finding fault that no opportunity was given to the respondents in the enquiry said to have been held under Section 5-A of the Act. To arrive at such a conclusion, as can be seen from the impugned orders, the High Court took note of the fact that 24-3-1997 was a gazetted holiday but the Special Land Acquisition Officer had filed an affidavit stating that it was a restricted holiday. However, it was ultimately found by the High Court that it was a gazetted holiday and not a restricted holiday. The High Court also took note of another fact that no fixed date was given for hearing the objections and having regard to the affidavits filed in the case, the High Court found that opportunity was not given to the landowners at the time of hearing objections under Section 5-A of the Act. 3. The learned Senior Counsel for the appellants urged that the High Court was not right and justified in quashing even the notification issued under Section 4( 1) of the Act, assuming that opportunity was not given to the landowners during enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. At best, opportunity could have been given. Although, according to them opportunity was given to the landowners. 4. In opposition, the learned counsel for the respondent landowners made submissions in support of the impugned orders. They asserted that the respondents were not given opportunity of hearing during the enquiry said to have been held under Section 5-A of the Act. They also submitted that there have been some subsequent developments. 4. In opposition, the learned counsel for the respondent landowners made submissions in support of the impugned orders. They asserted that the respondents were not given opportunity of hearing during the enquiry said to have been held under Section 5-A of the Act. They also submitted that there have been some subsequent developments. When we specifically asked, whether the High Court could quash the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, even assuming that the respondents were denied opportunity of hearing during the course of the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, the learned counsel were not in a position to give any satisfactory reply in this regard. It is well settled that notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act normally cannot be quashed unless there are exceptional circumstances, like the one where the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act suffers from incurable irregularity, such as, total vagueness in regard to the property to be acquired and in regard to the public purpose. 5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. Since the High Court, on examining the facts and having regard to the affidavits filed in the case, has arrived at a conclusion that the respondents were not given opportunity of hearing and in the absence of records placed before us to show that, as a matter of fact, opportunity of hearing was given to the respondents, we have no good reason to take a different view in regard to the opportunity of hearing not given to the respondents. We have no hesitation in taking the view that the High Court committed an error in quashing the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act. Under the circumstances, these appeals are entitled to succeed partly; in other words, the notification issued under Section 6(1) of the Act is quashed while sustaining the notification issued under Section 4( 1) of the Act; in all other respects, the impugned orders are not disturbed. We direct that the respondents shall be given opportunity of hearing during the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, after giving fresh notice of hearing indicating a fixed date. It is open to the respondent landowners to bring to the notice of the Land Acquisition Officer as regards the subsequent developments. We direct that the respondents shall be given opportunity of hearing during the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, after giving fresh notice of hearing indicating a fixed date. It is open to the respondent landowners to bring to the notice of the Land Acquisition Officer as regards the subsequent developments. The Land Acquisition Authorities, after holding enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, as directed, shall proceed in accordance with law. 6. The civil appeals are, accordingly, allowed in part. 7. No costs.