ORDER K. Ramaswamy, J.
1. The question whether the appellant is an interested person or not is now covered by the majority Judgment of a Constitution Bench of this Court in U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Gyan Devi (dead) by LRs. , wherein it was held that they are interested persons. However, it was directed that they are entitled to file appeals against the awards passed by the reference Court. Though the appeals have been filed in the High Court, the High Court dismissed them solely on the ground of delay since by that date they were barred by limitation. The High Court should not have dismissed the appeals as the appellants were not eo nominee impleaded as respondents nor notice was given in the reference Court. We think that dismissal of the Appeals as having barred by limitation is not justified. The order of the High Court is set aside accordingly. The appeals are remitted to the High Court. The High Court is requested to dispose of the appeals on merits. It is open to the appellants to place such of the evidence which they seek to rely on before the High Court and it is open to the respondents also to contest the same. If necessary, the High Court may call for a fresh finding from the reference Court and then to dispose of the appeals according to law.
2. The appeals are accordingly allowed. No costs.
3. Where awards were not already executed, the interim stay granted by this Court would continue till the disposal of the appeals by the High Court.