1 W.P.No. 5786 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 5786 OF 2006 Vinodkumar Ramnth Agrawal ..PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Mah. & ors. ..RESPONDENTS Mr V.P. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr P.P. More, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 to 3; Mr Vijay Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.4 CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 5th April, 2011 PER COURT : The petitioner has challenged the notification issued on 4.1.1988 on the ground that it has lapsed. Admittedly, an award has been passed under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. The acquisition was made under the provisions of section 126 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act. Now it is the contention of the petitioner that because the time stipulated under section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act has elapsed, the acquisition proceedings lapse. This issue is no longer res integra. This issue has been decided by the Supreme Court in its 2 W.P.No. 5786 of 2006 judgment in the case of Girnar Traders vs. State of Maharashtra & ors., (2011) 3 SCC 1. (the Constitution Bench). Petition rejected. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) ( SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) amj/wp5786.06