JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition was filed by petitioners way back in the year 2003 inter-alia with prayer that respondents be directed to release amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,46,218/- to petitioners together with interest thereon from the date of award dated 04.02.1991 and exemplary costs may also be awarded in their favour. 2. Ms. Suman Shekhawat, learned counsel for petitioners, has argued that land measuring 2 bigha 17 biswa of petitioners bearing Khasra No.781 situated in village Alwar No.1, was required by the Government for benefit of Indian Railways. An interim award to that effect was passed by Land Acquisition Officer on 04.02.1991 invoking urgency clause and thereafter the Sub Divisional Officer passed final award on 03.05.1995. When the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued by Land Acquisition Officer, the petitioners' names were shown but they never appeared before Land Acquisition Officer claiming their share in the amount of compensation. Petitioners then filed a revenue suit before the Sub Division Officer, Alwar, under Sections 88, 89, 53 and 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, which was dismissed by Sub Divisional officer. However, petitioners filed an appeal before Revenue Appellate Authority, which was disposed of by judgment dated 20.06.2000 on the basis of compromise between the parties. The Revenue Appellate Authority held that as per the compromise between the parties arrived on 18.01.1999, the petitioners, namely, Duli Chand, Bheru, Laxman and Mst. Phooli, have equal share in land bearing Khasra No.781 measuring 2 bigha 17 biswa and petitioners were accordingly declared recorded khatedar tenant of the land in dispute. It is argued that since the Revenue Appellate Authority decided the appeal on the basis of compromise between the parties, no further appeal against the judgment, which has attained finality, could be filed. It is therefore prayed that respondents be directed to make payment of compensation to petitioners with interest thereon. 3. Shri S.D. Khaspuria, learned Additional Government Counsel, though opposed writ petition but could not dispute that Revenue Appellate Authority had decreed the suit filed by petitioners, on the basis of compromise-deed dated 18.01.1999, in which petitioners were declared entitled to receive equal share of compensation for acquisition of land bearing Khasra No.781 measuring 2 bigha 17 biswa, and private respondents for the land of Khasra No.782 measuring 2 bigha 1 biswa. 4. 4. In view of the facts succinctly noticed above, there was no justification for the respondents State not to make payment of compensation to petitioners. Private respondents despite service of notice, have chosen not to appear before this court for obvious reason that judgment of Revenue Appellate Authority was passed on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In these circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to make payment of compensation to petitioners together with statutory rate of interest thereon, within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before them.Writ Petition Allowed. *******