The main legal point established in the judgment is that the objections raised under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 must be duly considered, and the failure to do so would defeat the minimum rights available to a person whose lands are to be compulsorily acquired.

JUDGMENT

M.S.SONAK,J. Heard Mr. Anacleto Viegas learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manish Salkar learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

2. The challenge in this petition is to the notifications under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (said Act) issued on 01.09.2008 and 23.09.2009 proposing to acquire petitioner's property bearing survey number 115/23p, Deussua, Chinchinim Goa (said property) for construction of a road.

3. By section 4 notification issued on 01.09.2008, the appropriate government declared its intention to acquire land to the extent of 50 sq mts out of the property bearing Survey No. 115/23P.

4. The petitioner, on 10.10.2008 filed objections under Section 5A of the said Act. Several objections were raised and the same are transcribed below for the convenience of reference:

(a) That the proposal is neither genuine nor bonafide, as it will not serve public purpose, because there is only one residential house to which, there is already road available and used by the said persons.

(b) That the area proposed to be acquired is not minimum and in accurate.

(c) That the proposed road is not benefiting the undersigned and on the contrary it reduces the set back area of the residential dwelling house and touches the outer wall of the house and passes beneath the RCC slab of the roof.

(d) That the boundary wall is required to be demolished incase the proposed road is finalized.

(e) The road could be aligned through property surveyed under Survey No. 107/1 and 107/2 of Deussua Village if at all the same is required.

(f) That instead of acquiring and causing damage to the property surveyed under survey No. 115/23 of Deussua Village, of the undersigned, the land could be easily acquired without causing any damage to any one from the approach road connecting to the property surveyed under Survey No. 1077/1 and 107/2 of Deussua Village.

(g) That the property of the undersigned is a small plot of land and incase the proposed road is constructed the said plot will be rendered unfit for further development and that it will lead to accidents, as the free movement of our children outside our house will be restricted, as there will be no place to move and play for our children.

(h) That the proposed acquisition is not falling within the streamline procedure, as laid down in Circular dated 07/04/2003 of Revenue Department bearing No. 22/17/2001-RD(LA).

(i) The entire proposed acquisition is beng sought through property surveyed under Survey No. 115/23 and adjoining holdings within the setback area of the house of the undersigned and others touching outer walls of the house with malafide intentions, ulterior motives and on account of political differences.

(j) Grave and irreparable loss and injury will be caused to the undersigned incase, the land from the plot of the undersigned surveyed under survey no. 115/23 is acquired, which cannot be compensated in terms of money, as the plot of the undersigned will be reduced in size, thus rendering the same unlit for development.

5. The petitioner also sought a personal hearing before the Land Acquisition Officer at the time of consideration of his objections under Section 5A of the said Act.

6. The petitioner, along with the objections under Section 5A had also annexed a certificate dated 14.11.2008 issued by the E.B.S. Kossambe, Consultant Engineer and Government Approved Valuer explaining the impact which the acquisition will have on the said property proposed to be acquired as well as the remaining property of the petitioner.

7. The Land Acquisition Officer made a Section 5A report on 31.08.2009. If the report is perused, though, there is no reference to the objections raised by the petitioner so much so that the Land Acquisition Officer does not even refer to the said property, i.e. the property bearing Survey No. 115/23p in which interest is claimed by the petitioner. There is no recommendation for the acquisition of the said property bearing Survey numbe