IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 132 OF 2008 MR. ARMANDO CRASTO AND 7 ORS., ... Petitioners Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Shivan Dessai, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Ms. L. Dharwadkar, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Coram:- R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 17th March, 2008 P.C.:- Heard. The Petitioners challenge the execution proceedings initiated pursuant to the publication of the Declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act in relation to property bearing Chalta No. 9 of P. T. Sheet No.20, Chalta Nos.5, 6 and 7 of P.T. Sheet No.21 and Chalta Nos.16 and 19 of P. T. Sheet No.36 situated at Margao, Goa, on the ground that the alternative available land which was pointed out by the Petitioners was not at all considered for the purpose of which the present land is sought to be acquired and secondly, on the ground that the land sought to be acquired is an agricultural land and the Petitioners are the tenants in relation to the said land and Government endeavour should be to protect their agricultural lands unless the exigencies demand otherwise, and that as there is another land available for construction of hospital, it cannot be said that there are exigencies for utilization of the land in question for construction activity. As regards the first ground of challenge, undisputedly the Petitioners in their objection filed under Section 5 of the Land Acquisition Act had raised the point of availability of vacant land admeasuring 40,447 sq. meters at Monte Hill belonging to the Hospicio Hospital, Margao where the proposed hospital can be constructed on the vacant land. The Petitioners, however, had nowhere pointed out as to how the land admeasuring 40,447 sq. meters at Monte Hill could be said to be the alternative land for the purpose of construction of the hospital proposed to be set up in the land. Nevertheless, the Collector in his Report filed while dealing with the said objection had clearly observed that "with regards to the contention of the availability of land at Monte Hill, Margao, the said area is on the top of the hill called Monte Hill which is also at the center of the Margao town surrounded by congested Margao-Fatorda area having no infrastructural good approach roads, the only road available is in front of present Hospicio Hospital which is always congested with heavy traffic and traffic jam is seen almost everyday as such the land available at Monte Hill is not ideal for construction of District Hospital. I will like to also note that presently there are buildings catering T.B. Hospital and other Government buildings at Monte Hill". Even in the objections filed by the Petitioners themselves they had clearly admitted that the T.B. Hospital is existing on the land which comprises of 40,447 sq. meters. In other words, a part of the land bearing an area of 40,447 sq. meters is already occupied by T.B. Hospital at Margao. The Report further discloses that apart from T.B. Hospital some other Government buildings are also situated and the same was not even disputed by the Petitioners. Besides, merely pointing out that some other land is available for the purpose of establishment of the hospital could not be sufficient to contend that such land is the alternative land for the proposed hospital. It is not the case of the Petitioners that the Petitioners had pointed out that the land at Monte Hill was suitable in all respect for the purpose of construction of the building required to house the hospital. As regards the second ground of challenge, the Collector while considering the said aspect had clearly observed in his Report under Section 5A that "the present proposed land is situated at the outskirt of Margao town touching to Margao-Panaji Highway 17 and it is a plain land ideal for the proposed project. The present Hospicio Hospital is situated in the old small buildings in this town which is very congested and there is no any scope for developmetnt/renovation or expansion of the said buildings and also it causes traffic congestion and in case of emergency it becomes very difficult to bring and take out the patients to take them to Goa Medical College, Bambolim as otherwise as the present hospital situated in the heart of the city of Margao have no road infrastructure". It has also been observed in the Report that "the proposed land is ideal for the project of District Hospital as it is situated at the outskirt of Margao town having all infrastructural facilities and even there are no much residential houses in and around the proposed land". The concerned authority having applied its mind and having found the proposed land to be suitable for the construction of the District Hospital and the Government having accepted the said Report, goes without saying that Government on its application of mind has considered the land to be suitable for the District Hospital. Apart from contending that the land at Monte Hill is in the heart of the city, no other aspect had been brought to our notice in the petition so as to remand the matter for consideration thereof by the authority. In the Report under Section 5A, the authority has highlighted the advantages of having District Hospital at the proposed site. Being so, there is absolutely no substance in the second ground of challenge. Merely because the land is being utilized for agricultural purpose that cannot be a ground for interference in the proceedings when the Report clearly highlights the need and necessity of the land in question for the hospital. There is no case for interference. Petition is therefore rejected. R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.