the procedure prescribed therein. 25. In any case, even if the constructions were to be authorized, it would not materially affect our outcome. As has been held by this Court on several occasions, exempting lands bearing constructions from acquisition is a matter of State Policy, and not 17of law.6 In case the Government finds that exempting such lands would adversely affect the larger Development Plan or any other purpose behind the acquisition, then it can still continue with the acquisition.7 Private interest of a few, should give way to the public interest of the many. Prior authorization of the constructions is also not the definitive saving grace that the Respondents imagine it to be. In fact, this Court has repeatedly allowed acquisitions even in cases where the construction was specifically authorized by the government beforehand, as was the case in State of Haryana v. Vinod Oil & General Mills:8 “8. Acquisition of the respondents' lands was held to be vitiated on the ground