Judgment :- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for and quash the impugned proceedings of the first respondent, dated 20.4.2004 and to direct the respondents to disburse the enhanced amount of compensation, together with the statutory benefits due to the petitioners. 2. The issue arising for consideration is with regard to the acquisition of some of the lands in Narasingapuram Village, by the state Government, in favour of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The Section 4 (1) Notification had been issued in the Government order in G.O.Ms.No.916, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 17.7.1980. After the necessary formalities had been completed, an award had been passed, on 19.5.1985. Since, the compensation awarded to the owners of the lands was very low, a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, was sought for by one of the land owners. The reference had been made and it had been numbered as L.A.O.P.No.5 of 1991, on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Salem. After a due enquiry, the compensation amount had been enhanced. Thereafter, the matter had been agitated before this Court, in A.S.No.26 of 1997. While so, a number of erstwhile owners of the lands acquired by the state Government had made representations to the Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition), Neighbourhood scheme, Salem, the first respondent herein, requesting for the grant of higher compensation for their lands. Since, the representations had not been disposed of, the petitioners had come before this Court, by way of a writ petition, praying for a writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to pass orders on their representations. Though this Court had directed the first respondent to dispose of the representations of the petitioners, the first respondent could not comply with the direction issued by this Court, since, an appeal, in A.S.No.26 of 1997, was pending on the file of this Court, with regard to the awarding of enhanced compensation, in respect of the lands in question. In such circumstances, the first respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 20.4.2004, expressing his inability to comply with the directions of this Court. 3. In such circumstances, the first respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 20.4.2004, expressing his inability to comply with the directions of this Court. 3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had submitted that the appeal, in A.S.No.26 of 1997, had been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, by its order, dated 9.1.2009 and therefore, the first respondent could be directed to dispose of the representations of the petitioners, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period. 4. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondent had not disputed the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 20.4.2004, is set aside and the first respondent is directed to dispose of the representations of the petitioners, dated 30.04.2004, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are directed to furnish a copy of the representation, dated 30.04.2004, to the first respondent, along with a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected W.P.M.P.No.43281 of 2005 is closed.