IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1559/2011 MOHAN BHOPLE AND ANOTHER ..VS... SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ANOR - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Bhide, adv for petitioner Shri P.D. Kothari, AGP for respondent 1 & 2 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & P.B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 05, 2011. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the section 4 notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act as also the further proceedings. It is necessary to note that the land of the petitioner is sought to be acquired by the State Government for rehabilitation of the project affected persons. The petitioner raised an objection before the Special Land Acquisition Officer. A section 5-A enquiry was conducted and the objection was duly considered by the Land Acquisition Officer by the order dated 15.2.2011. The petitioner was duly heard and the grievance of the petitioner in regard to the acquisition of the petitioner's fertile land, when Rambhu Avachar's land of inferior quality was available, was overruled. The objection of the petitioner was considered by the Land Acquisition Officer as he found that the land of Rambhau Avachar was situated in partially submerged zone and therefore it could not have been selected for rehabilitation purposes. There was also no resolution of the Gram Sabha for acquisition of the land of Rambhau Avachar for rehabilitation purposes. The Land Acquisition Officer found that the Gram Sabha had passed a resolution demanding the petitioner's land for rehabilitation and hence, the same was being acquired by the State for the purposes of rehabilitation . In the facts of the case it cannot be said that the objection of the petitioner was not duly considered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. In fact, the case of the petitioner about the suitability of the land of Rambhau Avachar was duly considered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and the same was rejected as it was in the partially submerged zone. Since we find no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE SMP