1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No.7757 OF 2008 With Civil Application No.155 Of 2010 Parwatibai w/o Parmesh Wesmode .. Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra& Ors. .. Respondents. -------- Shri. S.R. Palnitkar, Advocate for petitioner. Shri. D.R. Kale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Shri. P.G. Rodge, Advocate for respondent No. 7. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE: 20th APRIL 2010 PER COURT : 1) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) The petitioner challenges the acquisition proceedings in respect of land Gut 2 No.36/1 to the extent of 1 H 77 R situated at village Majarwadi, Taluka Mukhed, District Nanded, on the ground that the objection filed under section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act were not considered by the Sub Divisional Officer / Special Land Acquisition Officer. The petitioner's land is fertile. It is at the centre of the village and in view of the alternate lands being available, the acquisition proceedings initiated in respect of petitioner's land is required to be quashed and set aside. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, as the petitioner was holding 1 Hectare 77 R land she would become landless and therefore even on this count the acquisition is bad in law. 3) Original record was produced before us by the leaned Assistant Government Pleader. We have perused the same. The officer 3 concerned had issued notice for spot inspection under section 5-A of the Act. The notice was served on the petitioner (page 363 of the Record). Thereafter the spot inspection was conducted by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and the matter was referred to the Divisional Commissioner Aurangabad for issuance of Section 6 notice. In Annexure 3 to the Report (page 413 of the Record) against the name of the petitioner the officer endorsed that she did not file any objection. From the record (page 427) it is seen that, the petitioner had filed her objection dated 21-12-2006 addressed to the Deputy Collector, Sub Divisional Office Degloor. 4) The Award is declared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31-7-2008. This writ petition was filed on 1-12-2008 i.e. after passing of the award. The petitioner did not file any objection in time when the 4 Special Land Acquisition Officer considered the matter and forwarded the same to the Commissioner Aurangabad for issuance of notice under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the light of these developments and the record placed before us, we do not find that the acquisition proceedings initiated and the award passed is required to be quashed. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on reported judgment in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Darius Shapur Chenai, AIR 2005 SC 3520. We have perused the same. 5) The writ petition is dismissed. 6) Civil Application No.155 of 2010 does not survive, it stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.) rsl/ wp.7757.08