- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6061 OF 2007 ... Shukarya Mahya Baraf & ors. ...Petitioners v/s. Union of India & ors. ...Respondents ... Ms.Bhavana Shah for the Petitioners. Mr.S.S.Deshmukh for Respondents Nos. 2 to 4. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & V.M.KANADE, JJ. DATED: 22ND JANUARY, 2008 P.C.: 1. By this petition, the Petitioners challenge the notification issued under Section 6 of the Land - 2 - Acquisition Act for acquiring the land for setting up Industrial Town Ship. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners initially submitted that the land which is to be acquired is in green-zone and therefore can not be acquired for setting up the Industrial Town-ship. 3. Therefore, we called for the 5A report submitted by the Land Acquisition Officer. That report shows that no such objection was raised when notice under Section 4 was issued. Perusal of the 5A inquiry report shows that each of the objections raised by the Petitioners has been dealt with and none of the objections remained to be considered. The necessity of hearing during 5A inquiry is that all the objections raised by the objectors are properly dealt with. Perusal of 5A report shows that each and every objection raised by the Petitioners has been properly dealt with. It was contended that in the proceedings pending before the Supreme Court there is a statement made that the land to be acquired for the Industrial town-ship is in green-zone. It appears from the order of the Supreme Court that that order was made on the basis of the objections raised by those - 3 - persons who were before the Supreme Court. In these proceeding we have to see that whether the objections raised by the objectors have been properly considered or not. Then relying on two judgments, one of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sukumar M. Khot & ors. v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors., 2006(3) ALL MR 302, and other of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn.Ltd. v/s. Darius Shapur Chenai and ors, AIR 2005 SC 3520, it was submitted that the land acquisition officer has to produce the report before the competent authority and it is mandatory for the land acquisition officer while submitting the report under 5A of the Land Acquisition Act to make recommendations. We find that the report of the Land Acquisition Officer submitted to the competent authority for issuing notification under Section 6 is placed before us. That report shows that all objections have been considered by the Land Acquisition Officer and the report further shows that in relation to each objection the Land Acquisition Officer has made his recommendation to the competent authority. What the Land Acquisition Officer is supposed to do is while making report under Section 5A he has to consider the objections and expressed - 4 - his opinion, which is in the form of recommendation, to the competent authority on that objection. No separate recommendation is required to be made by the Land Acquisition Officer. The opinion expressed by the Land Acquisition Officer is termed as his recommendation because the Land Acquisition Officer is not the authority which decides whether the land is to be acquired or not. The decision whether the land is to be acquired or not is to be taken by the Government or the delegate of the Government. Therefore, the opinion expressed by the Land Acquisition Officer is in the form of his recommendation. 4. We find that all objections raised by the Petitioners have been properly dealt with. The land is being acquired for the Industrial Town-ship. Therefore, there is no question of there not being a public purpose for the acquisition of the land compulsorily. In our opinion, therefore, there is no substance in the petition. Petition is, therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) - 5 - (V.M.KANADE, J.)