Judgment :- 1. The lands of the petitioners were acquired under the Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978 by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act in Villupuram District Gazette dated 17.11.1998. The petitioners filed W.P.Nos.20616 and 20617 of 1998 before this Court questioning the acquisition proceedings. Their Writ Petitions were dismissed by an order dated 4.12.2001 in W.P.Nos.20616 and 20617 of 1998. 2. Thereafter, the petitioners herein filed Writ Appeal Nos.717 and 718 of 2002. The appeals were rejected and the order of the learned Single Judge was confirmed. 3. Thereafter, the petitioners made representation dated 25.9.2010 to withdraw the acquisition proceedings in respect of their lands. They filed W.P.No.1033 OF 2012 seeking for a direction to the Government to consider their representation dated 25.9.2010 seeking withdrawal of the acquisition proceedings. 4. This Court disposed of W.P.No.1033 of 2012 on 12.1.2012 directing the first respondent to pass orders on the representation dated 25.9.2010. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 28.5.2013 is passed stating that the acquisition proceedings cannot be withdrawn as 117 beneficiaries were identified and the beneficiaries have to be provided free house site pattas from the lands acquired. 5. The petitioners have filed this Writ Petition seeking to quash the aforesaid order dated 28.5.2013 and for a consequential direction to withdraw the land acquisition proceedings by resorting to alternate site. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that alternate sites are available and alternate sites should be acquired and the beneficiaries should be given alternate sites. Hence, the impugned order is bad and illegal. 8. I am not in agreement with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 9. Paragraph 2(1) of the impugned order is extracted below: “TAMIL” 10. Already the petitioners questioned the acquisition proceedings and they lost before this Court. The acquisition proceedings attained finality in 2007 itself. Now they cannot seek to withdraw the acquisition proceeding and they cannot seek to resort to acquire alternate site. 11. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.