JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Challenge in the appeal is to an order dated 15.09.2014 disposing of writ petition filed by Tejpal noting that for the acquired land decision has been taken to give 25% developed land in lieu of compensation. The direction issued is that the decision taken by the Rajasthan Housing Board would be taken to its logical conclusion. The appellants sought a review pleading that there was a revenue suit pending between the parties and thus for the acquired land the writ-petitioner could not be awarded compensation by handing over 25% of the developed land. 3. For the purposes of the appeal sufficient would it be for us to note that 10 Bigha and 19 Biswa acquired land comprised in khasra Nos. 219, 220 and 221 in village Pushkar, District Ajmer was in the khatedari of late Narayan S/o Lachha. The claim of the appellants was that on death of Narayan his sons: Ram Prasad @ Rama, Madan (since deceased), Kalu and Pukhraj inherited the khatedari rights. 4. It is the further case of the appellants that on death of Narayan, Pukhraj got entered the entire land in his name on a mutation and later sold the same to writ-petitioner Tejpal and one Jhalaram. The further case of the appellants is that the suit filed by them for correction of the revenue record was dismissed on 25.09.2007, against which appeal was allowed by the Revenue Appellate Authority on 02.03.2009 remanding the matter for fresh adjudication before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. Against the order dated 02.03.2009 appeal was filed before the Board of Revenue which directed status quo to be maintained. It is the further case of the appellants that appeal is pending. 5. From the facts noted above, it is apparent that inter se dispute between the heirs of Narayan cannot come in the way of the acquired lands being taken possession of. Who would be entitled to compensation would depend upon the final decision taken in the revenue proceedings afore-noted. 6. Thus, we dispose of the appeal declaring that in the absence of any challenge to the acquisition proceedings, the possession of the acquired land would be taken over. 7. Who would be entitled to compensation would depend upon the final decision taken in the revenue proceedings afore-noted. 6. Thus, we dispose of the appeal declaring that in the absence of any challenge to the acquisition proceedings, the possession of the acquired land would be taken over. 7. As regards the issue of compensation whether it should be monetary or 25% of the acquired land, the parties may take resort to the provisions of Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the reason parties state that acquisition was completed under the said Act. 8. All pending applications are disposed of.