ORDER : 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, learned counsel appearing in Diary No(s). 24447/2021 submits that he would be appearing for the heirs and legal representatives of respondent No.1. 3. Mr. Atul Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Diary No(s). 22391/2021 to take steps to bring on record the heirs and legal representatives of deceased respondent. 4. Preliminary issue regarding maintainability of special leave petition(s) filed by the State Government or Delhi Development Authority (for short, “Authority”), as the case may be, is raised in light of decision of Co-ordinate Bench rejecting or allowing the concerned proceedings against the same judgment impugned in the respective special leave petition(s) or civil appeal(s). 5. According to the land-losers, rejection of challenge to the declaration of lapsing at the instance of Authority or State, would dis-entitle the other (i.e., Authority or State) to maintain successive petition against the same judgment; and especially where in the earlier round leave to appeal was granted by this Court and the appeal had been disposed of after hearing all concerned. In other words, the doctrine of merger is being invoked to buttress this preliminary objection. 6. On the other hand, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General is relying on the observations/dictum of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors. reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129 to contend that the effect of the declaration or conclusion recorded therein is to efface all the orders passed in the concerned special leave petition or civil appeal following the decision in Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. Harakchand Misirmal Solanki & Ors. reported in 2014 (3) SCC 183 — which has been expressly overruled and as noted in paragraph 365 of the reported decision. (Indore Development Authority). 7. It is urged that the effect of such overruling is to efface all the orders, including passed by this Court relying on Pune Municipal Corporation (Supra). 8. It is further urged that such overruling had rendered those decisions nullity and cannot be given effect to in particular the direction to restore possession of the acquired land to the original landowners. 9. We need not dilate on other contentions raised before us. 10. 8. It is further urged that such overruling had rendered those decisions nullity and cannot be given effect to in particular the direction to restore possession of the acquired land to the original landowners. 9. We need not dilate on other contentions raised before us. 10. Suffice it to observe that these matters require deeper examination, for which the same need to be placed before the three Judge Bench for hearing on 17.08.2022. 11. It will be open to the parties to get other connected matters involving aforesaid issue by pointing out this order to the Registry, which request may be considered by the Registrar (Judl.) for tagging of those cases along with these matters. 12. In the meantime, the parties are at liberty to file affidavits/additional documents