(1) THE short question that arises in this batch of appeals is whether there should be an approved area development scheme before initiating the acquisition proceedings under Section 41 of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (for short the MHADA Act). The High court following the ratio in State of T.N. v. A. Mohammed Yousef held that as there is no approved area development scheme envisaged under Section 28 of the Act, the landholders cannot effectively exercise their right of objection under proviso to Ss. (1 of Section 41 of the MHADA Act. Accordingly quashed the notification published under Section 41 of the Act.

(2) SHRI Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants contended that Section 41 postulates of only proposal and it is not necessary that there should be a pre-existing scheme under Section 28. Under Section 41 when once the government is satisfied that there is a proposal to carry out any of the plans, projects or proposals, then proceeding under Section 41 could legally be initiated by publication in the State Gazette to acquire the land. He contends that the State government in this behalf have stated in the impugned notification