1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.1215 OF 2010 Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR, AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 3RD MARCH, 2010 Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. The only issue that arises for our consideration is whether, Section 6 Notification of the Land Acquisition Act issued on 4th November, 2009 is barred by limitation provided by the Act. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the last 2 Notification under Section 4 to his knowledge was published on 2nd August, 2008. Considering the said date, the Section 6 Notification issued on 4th November, 2009 would be barred. 4. We called upon the respondents to produce the original record so as to consider the grievance of the petitioner in particular to indicate last date of publication of Section 6 Notification. Accordingly, the original record is produced before us. We have perused the same. It clearly indicates that the last section 4 Notification was published on 20th December, 2008. The panchanama of the said publication made in village 3 Chawadi of that date, is found in the original record. The xerox copy of the said panchanama is taken on record. Having regard to the said last publication on 20th December, 2008, the section 6 Notification issued on 4th November, 2009 would be obviously within time. 5. The Counsel appearing for the petitioner, however is disputing the correctness of the panchnama. He submits that the name of the petitioner does not appear as one of the panchas. This argument clearly overlooks that panchanama is in respect of publication done of village Chawadi in presence of five panchas, who are signatory thereto. It is not private notice 4 which was served on the petitioner, so as to obtain his signature on the said document. We do not find any substance in this petition. 6. Besides, we see no reason why the petitioner did not question the validity of Section 4 until January, 2010. It is obvious that the petitioner was aware about the last publication in the office of the Gram Panchayat on 20th December, 2008. In any case this would give rise to disputed questions of facts and same can not be entertained in the writ jurisdiction. Hence dismissed. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J) gas/wp1215.10