Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) was issued on 23.10.2013. This notification also includes property bearing H.No.8-4-364/366, admeasuring 189 square yards, situated at St. Marys Road, Secunderabad, owned by the petitioner. Notice under Section 5A of the Act was issued on 22.10.2013 calling for objections. The petitioner filed objections on 23.11.2013. On 26.11.2013, notice of personal hearing was issued along with the remarks of the Requisition Department. The petitioner filed further reply on 30.12.2013. Order was passed under Section 5A of the Repealed Act on 28.01.2014. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued and thereafter on 19.03.2014 notice under Section 9(3) and Section 10 of the Repealed Act was issued. The petitioner challenges the order under Section 5A of the Act, dated 28.01.2014.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the objections filed by the petitioner under Section 5A enquiry were not considered by the competent authority and the order does not assign reasons as to why the objections filed by the petitioner are not valid except saying that the objections are overruled. No personal hearing was given during Section 5A enquiry. Thus, the order is ex facie illegal on account of the actions of the respondents in not affording personal hearing and not assigning the reasons for not considering the objections. The statutory mandate as imposed by Section 5A of the Repealed Act are violated and, therefore, the proceedings are liable to be set aside on that ground alone.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the objections filed by the petitioner include that the acquisition was not done equally on both sides of the road, whereas the property was sought to be acquired only on one side of the road and the same is illegal. It was specifically alleged that the proposed allotment was intended to favour the properties of Manohar Talkies and Sikh Gurudwara side. He further contended that there is no requirement to acquire the land of the petitioner as the road is sufficiently wide. Widening is done in a haphazard manner. No physical personal inspection was conducted to identify the requirement of acquiring the properties of the petitioner.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader does not dispute the contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no reasons are assigned for not accepting the objections and that no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner.

5. Section 5A of the Act reads as under:

5A. Hearing of objections.-

(1) Any person interested in any land which has been notified under section 4, sub- section (1), as being needed or likely to be needed for a public purpose or for a Company may,[ within thirty days from the date of the publication of the notification], object to the acquisition of the land or of any land in the locality, as the case may be.

(2) Every objection under sub- section (1) shall be made to the Collector in writing, and the Collector shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard [in person or by any person authorized by him in this behalf] or by pleader and shall, after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry, if any, as he thinks necessary,[ either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under section 4, sub-section (1), or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land, to the appropriate Government, containing his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of the proceedings held by him, for the decision of that Government]. The decision of the[ appropriate Government] on the objections shall be final.

(3) For the purpose of this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land were acquired under this Act.] Declaration of intended acquisition.

6. In Womens Education Trust and another vs. State