1 wp4130.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4130 OF 2010 Dattu Gopal Bhagare & Ors. : Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents ... Mr.R.D.Dave for the petitioners. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, Govt. Pleader for respondent nos.1 & 3. Mr.A.V.Anturkar for respondent no.2. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : JULY 27, 2010. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respective respondents. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is in respect of the land acquisition proceeding initiated by the respondents for acquiring the land under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”). It is contended that the notification under section 3-A of the said Act was issued on 17.9.2007. However, the 2 wp4130.10 description of the land belonging to the petitioners was not properly given. It is further contended that the respondents also did not give any opportunity to the petitioners in this regard. The learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, contended that the award passed by the authorities dated 19.1.2010 is bad in law. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that the notification under section 3-A of the said Act was issued by the authorities in which the description of the land belonging to the petitioners has been mentioned. It is, therefore, contended that the grievance raised by the petitioners in this regard is not correct. The learned Government Pleader further contended that another grievance raised by the petitioners that the publication of the notification under section 3-A was not in Marathi is also incorrect since the publication of the said notification was also made in a Marathi newspaper, viz., Maharashtra Times. The learned Government Pleader further states that the award has already been passed in the year 2010. 3. Considered the contentions raised by the respective counsel. In the instant case, the notification issued by the respondents under section 3-A of the said Act, in our view, is consistent with the provisions of section 3-A of the said Act. The same is also published in Marathi and, therefore, the grievance made by the petitioners in this regard, in our 3 wp4130.10 view, is not correct. In view of the clause in the notification, the person who is aggrieved was entitled to raise objections within a period of 21 days from the date of the said notification. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioners, in fact, have raised such an objection before the authorities concerned within the stipulated period mentioned in the said notification. In the absence thereof as well as for the reasons stated hereinabove, the petition is misconceived and the same is dismissed. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)