1. This order will govern final disposal of Writ Petition No.4370/2012 and Writ Petition No.5113/2012. The facts necessary for adjudication of this matter are taken from Writ Petition No.4370/2012.

2. The petitioner is having agricultural land at village Manpura Tahsil and District Gwalior. The petitioner has assailed the notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) (Annexure P-1). The basic ground for attack is that the notification (Annexure P-1) is not in consonance with the requirement of section 4 of the Act. It does not contain minimum details of the land which is sought to be acquired by the respondents. In absence thereof, the effective and minimum opportunity to file objection, is taken away and respondents have proceeded further and at the stage of proceeding under section 9 of the said Act, the petitioner came to know about it and submitted their detailed objection.

3. Shri V.K. Bharadwaj, learned senior counsel submits that on bare reading of section 4 of the Act as interpreted in various judgments, it is crystal clear that the purpose and intention to issue notification is to make the persons aware that the Government intends to acquire their land. Accordingly, it is the minimum and inevitable requirement to show the description of the land with precision and accuracy in Annexure P-1, so as to enable the effected persons to submit their objection with regard to such acquisition. By drawing the attention of this Court to the notification (Annexure P-1), learned senior counsel submits that it talks about “enclosed list” whereas no list is enclosed with Annexure P-1. In other words, it is submitted that in the notification (Annexure P-1) it is stated that Government intends to acquire certain land as mentioned in the “enclosed list”, however, notification does not contain any such list and, therefore, the description of the land sought to be acquired is totally absent. Only name of the village is mentioned where land is proposed to be acquired and it is mentioned that the plan of the land is available in the office of Land Acquisition Officer, Gwalior, where it can be seen. Criticizing the said notification, it is argued that it does not fulfil the statutory and mandatory requirement of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and, therefore, the valuable right of the petitioner is taken away. By taking this Court to various sections after section 4(1) till section 9, it is stated that the respondents have proceeded further without affording reasonable, adequate, effective and sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to put forth objection and at the stage of quantifying the compensation, the petitioner came to know about it and submitted his objection. He submits that impugned proceeding suffers from serious basic infirmity and, therefore, the basic notification under section 4 needs to be set aside. He relied on several judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court in support of the aforesaid contention.

4. Per contra, Shri Newaskar supported the order Annexure P-1 and submits that indisputably Annexure P-1 is published in two local Hindi newspapers. In the notification which was published in the newspapers aforesaid, it is made clear that the petitioner/affected person can peruse the land map in the office of Land Acquisition Officer. Once name of the village is mentioned in the notification itself, it was open for the petitioner to peruse the map and submit his objection. Accordingly, he supported the notification Annexure P-1 and submits that it is in consonance with the requirement of the section 4 of the Act. In addition, Shri Newaskar submits that the petitioner submitted his objection Annexure P-6 and only prayed for giving adequate compensation as mentioned in the last paragraph of the said objection dated 8.6.2012 (Annexure P-6). He submits that the respondents are ready to decide this objection dated 8.6.2012 from the stage it was submitted before the concerned o