JUDGMENT RAKESH SHARMA, J.- This bunch of appeals involve common questions of fact and law, hence they are disposed of by a common judgment and order. 2. These appeals were presented between the years 2007-2008 by the Lucknow Development Authority assailing the judgment and order passed by the Reference Court" i.e., Presiding Officer, Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal, Lucknow. Through these judgments the Reference Court has answered the reference made by the land owners under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Reference Court has enhanced the amount of compensation i.e. 85 paise per sq. ft. to 4.60 paise per sq. ft. to the land owners of Ujariyaon Housing Scheme Part II falling in village Vijaepur Sadar Tehsil, Lucknow. The judgments have been rendered by the Reference Court on various dates, i.e., from 8.12.2006 to 30.4.2008 indicated in the record of the first appeal. 3. It emerges from the record that the L.D.A. had implemented a scheme for establishing Ujariyaon Awas Yojna Part II in Lucknow taking in account the growing the needs of house accommodation in the city of Lucknow. Accordingly, a request made to the State Government and notification under section 4 was issued on 8.12.1984. Section 6 notification was also issued on the same day. The SLAO had granted the award on 25.2.1987. Being aggrieved by the award, the landowners, farmers had sought reference under section 18 of the' Land Acquisition Act. Several references were made during the year 2006 to 2008 and the same were answered by the Reference Court giving rise to the alleged cause of action to the Lucknow Development Authority to challenge the said judgments. 4. It appears that the Court had framed two issues while adjudicating the references : 1. Kya Vishesh Bhumi Adhyapti Adhikari Dwara Ghosit Abhinirnay Anuchit Evam Aparyapta Hai ? 2. Any Koi Anutosh Jo Claimant Pane Ki Adhikari Hai ? 5. The Reference Court has dealt with evidences, i.e., location, situation of the land, area, potentiality of the land, exemplar sale deeds and various other factors. The Reference Court while answering the issue No. 1 has found that the land was close to Delhi Assam Highway, i.e., Highway No. 28. U.P. Avas Evam Vikash Parishad's established Colonies, Indira Nagar Colony Ismail Nagar etc. were already in existence on the eastern side of the acquired land. The Reference Court while answering the issue No. 1 has found that the land was close to Delhi Assam Highway, i.e., Highway No. 28. U.P. Avas Evam Vikash Parishad's established Colonies, Indira Nagar Colony Ismail Nagar etc. were already in existence on the eastern side of the acquired land. M/s. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. is having a large establishment factory close to the land. Most of the urban facilities like transport, electricity, sewerage, roads etc. were available on the lands in dispute. Educational Institutions, Hospitals were available on Lucknow Faizabad road-a nearby location. 6. The Reference Court had taken into account 5-6 sale deeds. It has taken note of the two judgments earlier rendered by the Reference Court which has allowed Rs. 4.60 paisa per sq. ft. as amount of compensation to the land owners of the close vicinity. The, Court has allowed judicial parity to the reference seeker, land owners. Ultimately taking into account all these relevant factors, the Reference Court has allowed Rs. 4.60 paisa per sq. ft. to the land owners. These judgments are under challenge before this Courts. 7. The order sheet further reveals that the appeals were presented by the learned Standing Counsel for the LDA, in the present case by Sri Pankaj Srivastava. The Stamp reporter on 5.9.2007 had reported that the appeals are defective as appropriate Court fee has not been paid. In most of the appeals it has been noted that the appeals were time barred. The appeals are defective. Two year have passed but the defects have not been removed by the L.D.A. and no steps have been taken. The appeals have not been pursued diligently and properly. It has been filed just like dropping a card in the post box to avoid and delay the settlement of poor farmers, land owners' claims. 8. Despite specific order passed by the Court on 23.7.2009 and 13.8.2009 on appellants' undertaking to make good the deficiency of Court fee, no steps have been taken to make good the same. 9. Sri V.K. Srivastava and Ms. Anju Singh have put in appearance on behalf of the land owners. They have expressed their anxiety that the lands of poor villagers whose only source of livelihood was agricultural land was acquired in the years 1984 to 87. More than 25 years have passed and till date they have not been paid the total amount of compensation. Anju Singh have put in appearance on behalf of the land owners. They have expressed their anxiety that the lands of poor villagers whose only source of livelihood was agricultural land was acquired in the years 1984 to 87. More than 25 years have passed and till date they have not been paid the total amount of compensation. Agriculturist whose lands were acquired by the mighty power of State applying the provisions of Land Acquisition Act for public purposes have not been paid the compensation. Sri V.K. Srivastava has drawn attention of the Court that these days lands near Faizabad road are being sold at the rate of Rs. 500-700 per sq. ft. LDA itself invited the applications from desirous persons at a much higher rate. Flats and multi-storey buildings are being constructed and are sold at much higher rate. The private persons who are allotted residential plots are selling the land for R,s. 500/-sq. ft. and commercial area are being sold at Rs. 2,000/-sq. ft. How long, the sufferance of poor farmers who have been deprived of their agricultural land which was like their mother to them will continue. The capitalists are reaping the fruits and harvest. Poor farmers are no getting the amount of compensation. They have been dragged in unnecessary litigations. The appellants for a long. time made no attempt to seek condonation of delay. The cases are lingering unnecessarily for years. 10. In view of the above, the Court has appreciated the submissions of the learned Counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. The order sheet reveals that the case was listed on various dates but no effective steps were taken to remove the defects and seek condonation of delay. Accordingly the appeals are dismissed for not removing the defects and taking steps as per law. 11. As far as the merits of the case are concerned, this Court has viewed these judgments in the light of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Revenue Divisional Officer-cum- L.A.O. v. Shaik Azam Saheb etc. 1 2009 (2) AWC 1617. and other relevant factors which are relevant for determining the amount of compensation such as potentiality, location and situation of land, developments made in the area and facilities provided etc. It is of the view that on merits also no case is made out to interfere. 12. The appeals are dismissed. Appeal Dismissed.