ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. The application for substitution of legal representatives of deceased appellants Devidayal, Rajender Singh, Puranchand and Santa Singh in Civil Appeal @ Special Leave Petition (civil) Diary No(s).3789/2018 is allowed. 3. Leave granted. 4. These appeals have been filed by the appellants against different judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court by which their applications filed in Regular First Appeals which were earlier disposed of have been rejected. The facts and issues raised in these appeals being more or less similar, for proper adjudication it shall be sufficient to refer to the facts as mentioned in the civil appeal filed by Tara Chand. 5. The State of Haryana issued a Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 dated 14.08.1987 for acquisition of land for the establishment of Grain Market, Safidon, District Jind. Section 6 Notification was also issued on 12.08.1988 which contained appellants' agricultural land also. The Land Acquisition Officer gave an Award @ of Rs. 80,000/- per acre with respect to three categories of land and Rs. 1,00,000/-per acre with regard to the land categorized as Gair Mumkin. The land owners including the appellants made a reference for enhancement of the compensation. The Additional District Judge, Jind vide Award dated 05.09.1994 allowed the land acquisition references by awarding Rs. 109/- per square yard irrespective of category of land. Against the award of the Land Acquisition Officer dated 05.09.1994 the land owners including the appellants filed Regular First Appeal in the High Court. The State as well as the Market Committee also filed Regular First Appeals in the High Court. The High Court by a common judgment dated 01.07.1997 allowed the Regular First Appeal filed by the State as well as of the Market Committee and the Regular First Appeals filed by the land owners including the appellants were dismissed. The Award rendered by the Additional District Judge dated 05.09.1994 was set aside and the Award dated 10.08.1990 rendered by the Collector was upheld. Certain land owners including one Trilok Singh filed Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of the High Court dated 01.07.1997 which was too dismissed on 28.07.1999. Being aggrieved, Trilok Singh filed an appeal by way of Special Leave Petition which was allowed by this Court vide its judgment dated 31.07.2001. Certain land owners including one Trilok Singh filed Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of the High Court dated 01.07.1997 which was too dismissed on 28.07.1999. Being aggrieved, Trilok Singh filed an appeal by way of Special Leave Petition which was allowed by this Court vide its judgment dated 31.07.2001. This Court set aside the judgment of the High Court dated 01.07.1997 and remitted the matter to the learned Single Judge to decide the appeal afresh. Vide Judgment of this Court dated 31.07.2001 Regular First Appeal of Trilok Singh and certain other land owners were heard and vide judgment dated 30.03.2009 the High Court decided the appeals by upholding the award of Additional District Judge dated 05.09.1994 and compensation was awarded @ Rs. 109/- per square yard. After the Judgment of the High Court dated 30.03.2009 various land owners including the appellant filed Miscellaneous Application in their Regular First Appeal which already stood decided on 01.07.1997. Tara Chand etc. filed CM No. 4525-CI-2013 in RFA No. 39 of 1995 and CM No. 4525-CI-2013 in RFA No. 41 of 1995. The High Court vide its judgment and order dated 21.02.2015 dismissed the said miscellaneous applications holding that the benefit of the judgment dated 30.03.2009 in RFA No. 1823 of 1990 cannot be extended to the appellants, Since after the judgment of the High Court dated 01.07.1997 the appellants did not pursue the matter any further. In Devi Dayal's appeal the order of the High Court dated 15.11.2013 is challenged wherein the civil miscellaneous application filed by the appellants in the respective Regular First Appeals were dismissed. Similarly, in Vidhya Devi's appeal the order dated 08.05.2012 passed in CM No. 2299-CI of 2012 in RFA No. 36 of 1995 has been challenged. 6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants in support of his submissions relies on the judgment of this Court in C.A. No. 764 of 2018 (Om Parkash v. State of Haryana) dated 19.01.2018 , the judgment dated 19.01.2018 in turn relies on an earlier judgment of this Court dated 09.05.2017 passed in C.A. Nos. 68226824 of 2017 (Fateh Singh Saini v. The Land Acquisition Collector-cum-DRO, Jind & Ors.) . 68226824 of 2017 (Fateh Singh Saini v. The Land Acquisition Collector-cum-DRO, Jind & Ors.) . The learned counsel for the appellants submits that sicne this Court in the aforesaid civil appeals, where the appellants had also not carried their claim after the judgment of the High Court dated 01.07.1997, extended the said benefit to those appellants, the same may also be extended to the present appellants because all are affected by the same acquisition. 7. Learned counsel for the State supported the judgment of the High Court. However, he submits that in no case the appellants are entitled for any interest on the amount of compensation. 8. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. Before we proceed further it is useful to notice the judgment of this Court dated 09.05.2017 passed in the case of Fateh Singh Saini (supra) in which case this Court has extended the benefit granting compensation @ Rs. 109/- per square yard to the appellants. The reasons given by this Court for extending the benefit of Rs. 109/- per square yard is found in the last two paragraphs which are to the following effect: "It is clear from the above that in respect of the same chunk of land which was acquired by the same notification, the compensation which has been fixed is at Rs. 109 per square yard. Even if the appellant sought a reference belatedly, he would still be entitled to the benefit of Section 28A of the Act. On that basis also, the appellant would have been entitled to the same compensation that has been awarded to the other landowners whose lands were acquired by that very notification. However, because of the fact that the appellant sought the reference belatedly, for the intervening period, the appellant shall not be entitled to claim any interest. We, thus, dispose of the appeal by awarding compensation to the appellant as well in respect of his land at the rate of Rs. 109 per square yard. If the compensation is paid within a period of one month, no interest shall be awarded. However, if the compensation is not paid within one month then the appellant shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of expiry of one month till the payment of compensation. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. However, if the compensation is not paid within one month then the appellant shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of expiry of one month till the payment of compensation. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. 10. Consequently, this Court again following the order dated 09.05.2017 extended the benefit in Om Parkash's case (supra) on 19.01.2018 by following short order: "Delay condoned. Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the parties finally. After hearing the parties, we are of the opinion that the matter is squarely covered by order dated May 09, 2017 of this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 6822-6824 of 2017. We, accordingly, allow this appeal of the appellant and hold that he shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 109 per square yard. However, in the facts of this case, the appellant shall not be entitled to interest for a period from 15.07.1997 to 15.11.2013. The compensation shall be calculated in the aforesaid manner and shall be paid to the appellant within two months from today. In case the payment is not made within the aforesaid period, the appellant shall be entitled to future interest from the date of this Order." 11. It is relevant to note that civil appeal of Devi Dayal & Ors. has been filed against the judgment of the High Court dated 15.11.2013 which in turn relies on the judgment in Om Parkash (supra). Against the judgment dated 15.11.2013, Civil Appeal No. 764 of 2018 has already been decided on 19.01.2018 by this Court which order has already been extracted above. 12. This Court has extended the benefit of compensation @ Rs. 109/- per square yard to those land owners who did not pursue the matter any further after their Regular First Appeal was dismissed on 01.07.1997. There is no dispute that the land of the appellants was also acquired by the same Notification and the Award dated 05.09.1994 delivered by the Additional District Judge was an Award which was also delivered in the references filed by the appellants also. Though the said Award was subsequently set aside by the High Court on 01.07.1997 but the High Court's order dated 01.07.1997 has been set aside in the special leave petition filed by other land owners although not by the appellants. 13. Though the said Award was subsequently set aside by the High Court on 01.07.1997 but the High Court's order dated 01.07.1997 has been set aside in the special leave petition filed by other land owners although not by the appellants. 13. In the facts of these cases and sequence of events as noted above, we are of the view that in the interest of justice the appellants have also to be extended the benefit of computation of their compensation @ Rs. 109/- per square yard as was directed by the Additional District Judge vide Award dated 05.09.1994 which has now been affirmed by the High Court vide order dated 30.03.2009. We, however, make it clear that in the facts of the present case, the appellants are not entitled for any interest on the above computation. We further direct that the compensation shall be calculated @ Rs. 109/- per square yard and the appellants shall be paid the enhanced compensation after adjusting the compensation already paid to them within two months from the date of production of a copy of this order before the Land Acquisition Officer/Collector, Jind, Haryana. In the event, the compensation is not paid within two months,thereafter the appellants shall be entitled for interest @ 12% per annum. 14. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.