IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 46 OF 2011 SHRI ANAND RAGHUNATH GAONKAR AND 4 ORS.,THROUGH POA, SHRI. SANTOSH SHABA GAONKAR ... Petitioner Versus THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER/DEPUTY COLLECTOR , PONDA-GOA ... Respondent Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, for the petitioner. Mr. A. Kakodkar, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the respondent. Coram:- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & F. M. REIS, JJ. Date:- 14th March, 2011 P.C. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Perused the award which has been made by the Deputy Collector and Sub Divisional Officer, Ponda Sub Division, Ponda-Goa. The award itself, recite that requisite public notices u/s 9 and 10 of the Act were issued on 30.11.2007 and the same were published at appropriate places on 6.12.2007 through the Mamlatdar of Ponda. The individual notices were also sent to the interested persons. The interested party namely Communidade of Curti did not remain present on the day of hearing, however preferred to file the reply to the notices served u/s 9 and 10 of said Act. The contention raised by the learned Counsel is that the notice u/s 9 was not served on the petitioners and in the absence of such notice u/s 9, the petitioners will have to remain satisfied with meagre compensation which has been determined and lying with the Revenue Department. There is a pending claim of the petitioners. The petitioners' status as "Tenant" is yet to be determined by the authority. For the purpose of the present petition, the Court cannot ignore the provision of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 and when the Award has been made after requiste, notice of making the award has been published and the limitation for making a reference u/s 18 has expired, the Court cannot set the clock back. More so when the petitioners do not dispute that notice u/s 9 were duly published. In such circumstances, there is no merit in the petition and it is dismissed. S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. F. M. REIS, J. ef.