JUDGMENT : Nelson Sailo, J. Parties are represented by their respective counsels. These matters have been clubbed together since the issues involved are similar and identical. Therefore, they are being disposed of by this common Order. 2. Brief facts of the case essential for disposal of the writ petitions is that the Government of Mizoram in the Land Revenue & Settlement Department through the Secretary of the said Department issued a preliminary notification under Section 11 (1) of the Mizoram (Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement) Act, 2016 (Act of 2016) for acquisition of land for construction of Zyhno-Mawhre-Chapi (ZMC Road) under the Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India for maintenance of National Security along the INDO-MYANMAR international border. As per the Schedule, the approximate area/dimension of land to be acquired was shown as 39.6 hectares/22.00 kms long. Thereafter, a final notification was issued by the same authority under Section 40 (2) of the Act of 2016 on 20.01.2021. 3. Be it stated herein that a coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 20/2014 and WP(C) No. 30/2014 vide a common Judgment & Order dated 15.11.2017 held that the Act of 2016 shall not be applicable in the State of Mizoram and instead, the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act of 2013) shall be applicable. Aggrieved with the judgment, the State preferred Writ Appeal Nos. 70 & 71/2018. Therefore, in view of the challenge made in the Writ Appeal, Clause 8 of the preliminary notification dated 16.10.2019 provided that the said notification will not stand in the way of the petitioners or cause any prejudice to them to make further claim under the Act of 2013 depending upon the outcome of Writ Appeal No. 70/2018 filed by the State Government in the Principal Seat of this Court. With the said caveat, the acquisition proceedings proceeded and culminated with the preparation of Draft Award No. 6/2021 and Draft Award No. 7/2021. The said Draft Awards admittedly were approved by the competent authority and thereafter, the compensation amount that was assessed has been paid to the land owners. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the Act of 2013 being more beneficial, they are entitled to receive compensation as per the assessment made under the Act of 2013. The said Draft Awards admittedly were approved by the competent authority and thereafter, the compensation amount that was assessed has been paid to the land owners. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the Act of 2013 being more beneficial, they are entitled to receive compensation as per the assessment made under the Act of 2013. For instance, the solatium that can be granted under the Act of 2016 varies from 10% to 100% of the compensation amount. Whereas, under the Act of 2013, the same is 100% of the compensation amount. The further grievance projected by the petitioners is that 10% of the compensation amount has been deducted as cess by the District Council authorities without any basis and therefore, the deducted amount should be refunded to them. It is also the case of the petitioners that they are not satisfied with the fixation of market value on their respective land and that they should get more than what has been fixed and assessed by the Collector concerned. However, since the State Government has failed to establish Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority in terms of Section 47 of the Act of 2016, the petitioners cannot submit a reference application under Section 60 of the same Act. It is their case that the aforementioned Sections are paramateria to Section 51 and Section 64 respectively of the Act of 2013. Therefore, the State respondents should be directed to establish the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority in terms of 2013 Act. 5. With the above facts and claims made by the petitioners, the matter was kept pending for some time in view of the pendency of the two (2) Writ Appeals namely, Writ Appeal No. 71/2018 and Writ Appeal No. 70/2018. The said two (2) Writ Appeals have since been considered by the Division Bench of this Court and disposed of vide Judgment & Order dated 30.10.2024. A copy of the Judgment & Order dated 30.10.2024 has been placed before this Court for perusal. Upon perusing the same, it is seen that the Division Bench has upheld the Judgment & Order of the learned Single Judge dated 15.11.2017, by which it was held that the Act of 2016 shall not be applicable to the State of Mizoram and instead it should be that Act of 2013 which should be applied for acquisition of land. Upon perusing the same, it is seen that the Division Bench has upheld the Judgment & Order of the learned Single Judge dated 15.11.2017, by which it was held that the Act of 2016 shall not be applicable to the State of Mizoram and instead it should be that Act of 2013 which should be applied for acquisition of land. It is therefore clear that the provisions to be applied for acquisition of land in the State of Mizoram are the provisions of the Act of 2013. 6. In respect of the other claims made by the petitioners i.e., refund of the cess amount deducted from the compensation to be received by them at the rate of 10% of the market value, it may be stated herein that this Court in WP(C) No. 103/2023 and WP(C) No. 60/2023 vide common Judgment & Order dated 21.11.2024 has held that there is no provision under the Mara Autonomous District Council (Land & Revenue) Act, 2018 to deduct cess from the compensation to be received by the land owners and therefore any deduction made is only illegal. Therefore, the authorities have been directed to refund the deducted amount within a time frame. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioners in the instant case is already covered by the referred judgment. 7. It may further be noticed that by the aforesaid common Judgment & Order dated 21.11.2024, this Court has also directed the State respondents to establish Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority in terms of Chapter-VIII of the Act of 2013. Therefore, the prayer made by the petitioners in the instant writ petitions is also covered by the said Judgment as well. 8. Thus upon perusal of the materials available on record and upon hearing the learned counsels for the rival parties, the writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions: 1) The petitioners shall within a period of three (3) weeks submit their respective applications before the District Collector, Siaha, giving all the details of their land which was acquired for the aforementioned purpose while also specifying the amount that they have already received. The petitioners may also indicate why the amount awarded is not acceptable to them by giving reasons other than non-application of the Act of 2013. The petitioners may also indicate why the amount awarded is not acceptable to them by giving reasons other than non-application of the Act of 2013. 2) The District Collector upon receipt of such applications shall undertake the exercise of re-assessment of the compensation amount to be received by each of the land owners for acquisition of their land by applying the provisions of the Act of 2013, inclusive of the solatium and interest and also interest on delayed payment entitled to each of the land owners. The amount already received by the petitioners as compensation shall be deducted from the assessment and compensation so made. Such an exercise shall be undertaken by the Collector as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within the outer limit of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the application to be submitted by the petitioners. 3) The Collector after preparing the assessment as per the Act of 2013 shall then obtain the approval of the competent authority in the State Government, if required and thereafter, forward the same to the respondent Union of India represented by the Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence, Sena Bhavan 101A, South Block, New Delhi-110011, the Chief Engineer Border Road Task Force (BRTF), Project Pushpak GREF, C/o 99 APO, Thuampui, Aizawl-796017 and The Executive Engineer (Civil) Officer Commanding, 71 Road Construction Coy (GREF)-930071 C/o 99 APO who upon receipt of the assessment made by the District Collector shall made necessary arrangement of the fund required and deposit the same before the Collector within three (3) months of receipt of the assessment. The amount shall then be disbursed to the land owners concerned as per the entitlement without delay. 4) Since a direction has already been given by this Court vide common Judgment and Order dated 21.11.2024 in WP(C) Nos. 103 and 60 of 2023 to constitute Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, the application submitted by the petitioners before the District Collector shall be treated as an application for reference and the Collector shall forward the same before the Authority concerned as and when the same is established. The applications shall then be considered by the Authority in accordance with law. 9. With the above observations and directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No cost.