ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Leave granted. 3. Belagavi Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "the BUDA") has filed these appeals being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 9th November, 2016 passed by the Division bench of the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench in W.A. Nos. 100688 of 2015 and 100041 of 2016 whereby appeals were allowed in part and following directions have been issued: "14(i) The BUDA is directed to restore the possession of the lands in question to their owners within one month from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of today's order. Thereafter, the Tahsildar shall restore their names in the record of rights and delete the name of BUDA in respect of the lands in question. (ii) In the alternative, if the BUDA wants to retain the land in question, the Land Acquisition Officer or any concerned authorised functionary of the Government shall pass the award in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the award amounts shall be disbursed to the writ petitioners. This exercise shall be done as expeditiously as possible and in any case within an outer limit of two months from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of today's order." 4. Writ petitions had been filed before the Single Judge praying for declaration that the proceedings under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 stood abated and to restore the names of the petitioners with respect to the 11392.62 Sq Mtrs of land comprised in R.S. No. 710/1 of Angol Belgaum in ULC-D-SR-653+655. 5. In the writ Petition, the State of Karnataka, the Deputy Commissioner, Belgaum District and the Tehsildar, Belgaum District were impleaded as respondents not the appellant- BUDA. 6. The fact remains that land was subject matter of acquisition for the benefit of the BUDA and the Award was passed in respect of the land comprised in the same survey number in respect of 26 gunthas 3 annas 2 paise whereas no award was passed with respect to approx. 13 gunthas 12 annas and 14 paise land as it was the subject matter of urban land ceiling proceedings 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 13 gunthas 12 annas and 14 paise land as it was the subject matter of urban land ceiling proceedings 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, it was necessary to implead the BUDA as respondent in the writ petitions as land had been admittedly acquired for its benefit. But it was not so done. Consequently, the Writ Appeal was preferred by the BUDA to the Division Bench. The Division Bench has issued the aforesaid directions in the appeal. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that it was necessary to implead the BUDA in the writ petition so that it could have put forth its point of view and to file reply. In the absence of impleadment of BUDA, the writ petition itself was not maintainable. We direct the impleadment of the BUDA as the respondent no. 4 in the writ petitions, we set aside the order passed by the Division Bench in the appeals as well as by the Single Judge in the writ petitions. 9. The case is remitted to the single judge to decide afresh after obtaining the reply from the BUDA. Eight weeks' time is granted to the BUDA to file its reply. Thereafter the writ petitions be heard and decided as expeditiously as possible. 10. The appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. All the contentions are left open to be decided.