4.The acquisition proceeded and by proceedings dated 20.09.2016, the third respondent passed an award under Section 23 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 30 of 2013”). Though, the third respondent referred to Section 23 of Act 30 of 2013, the award states that it is an “interim award”. Prior to passing the interim award dated 20.09.2016, the third respondent passed an award on 15.09.2014 under the provisions of the Central Act, 1894. This award was challenged by the appellants and others in W.P.Nos.27550 of 2014 and etc., batch, which were partly allowed by common order dated 05.08.2015, quashing the award dated 15.09.2014 passed by the third respondent under the provisions of the Central Act, 1894. In fact, the said award was also titled as an “interim award”. The Court further issued directions to the third respondent to follow Section 40(3) of Act 30 of 2013, and tender interim compensation to the appellants/property owners and thereafter, follow the other provisions of Act 30 of 2013 and complete the exercise as expeditiously as possible not latter than three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of the Judgment. At the relevant time, the Government had not framed Rules under Act 30 of 2013, though power was conferred under Section 109 of Act 30 of 2013. Therefore, the Court made an observation that the Government shall endeavour to frame Rules and follow the relevant provisions regarding appointment of Administrator, Commissioner for Rehabilitation and Resettlement, Constitution of Rehabilitation and Resettlement Committee, etc. The operative portion of the order reads as follows:
