BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-landowners question acquisition of their lands for the purposes of construction of a road leading to jetty of respondents No. 5 and 6, which are private limited companies engaged in mining business. Both the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 511/2007 are private limited companies, engaged in mining. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 542/2007, except petitioner No. 3, are individuals whose lands are also being acquired for the same purpose. Petitioner No. 2 therein is a temple of Shree Dev Chandrashwar, through its Managing Committee. The petitions have been directed to be disposed of at the stage of admission itself as per Order dated 15.1.2008. It appears that Writ Petition No. 542/2007 was admitted on 1.7.2008 and interim relief granted on 10.12.2007 was continued. It is admitted position that said Order dated 10.12.2007 is identical in both the writ petitions and the respondents were permitted to proceed further with acquisition proceedings and are restrained only from taking possession, but Award has been allowed to be made without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners. Accordingly, the State Government has proceeded further with acquisition and has declared the Award. It is apparent that the award fails, if the writ petitions are allowed.

(2.) The fact that lands belong to petitioners is not in dispute and filing of objections under Section 5-A by them is also not in dispute. The petitioners contend that because of political procedure and malafides, Section 5-A inquiry was completed with undue haste and it was only a farce. Their second contention is that the acquisition is for company and not for public purpose and in any case malafide one. Lastly, it is contended that the notification under Section 4, therefore, itself needs to be quashed and set aside. In view of this line of arguments, it is not necessary for this Court to go into the details of lands held by the petitioners and it can only be mentioned that those lands are also shown in the sketch map produced at page 61 along with Writ Petition No. 511/07. As objections are identical, the writ petitions were then heard together.

(3.) We have heard Senior Advocate Shri S.G. Dessai with Shri Shivan Dessai for the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 511/07, Advocate Shri Bhobe for the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 542/07, learned Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4 and Senior Advocate Shri S.D. Lotlikar for respondents 5 and 6 Private Companies.