THANVI, J. - (1.)The core controversy involved for consideration in these three special appeals is as to whether a notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') can be issued without affording opportunity of hearing to the land owner as required under Section 5A of the Act, therefore, all these special appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.)The learned Single Judge vide his judgment dated 29.5.2009 passed in the respective writ petitions recorded a finding that it is true that opportunity of hearing for deciding the objections raised under Section 5A was not given to the petitioners, but the objections were considered by the competent authority thoroughly and objectively in the national interest as the land was required for establishment of reserve battalian of the Border Security Force, therefore, no justifiable interference is required to quash the notifications issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Act. Learned Single Judge recorded his finding while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pratibha Nema & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & Ors. (3) reported in AIR 2003 Supreme Court 3140 and dismissed the writ petitions by concluding that no prejudice has been demonstrated by the petitioners for not providing personal hearing prior to deciding the objections raised by the petitioners and moreover when in the earlier public interest litigation in respect of the same acquisition proceedings, the Division Bench also did not choose to interfere for the significant cause that the land has been acquired for establishment of the BSF battalion.
(3.)The petitioners are said to be villagers of the converted Abadi land in the village Rathodon Ka Guda, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur, which has been mutated in their name by making necessary entries in the revenue record. The State Government issued notification under Section 4 of the Act on 1.10.2005 for acquiring the land for establishment of the headquarters of Reserve Battalion of BSF. The petitioners-appellants preferred objections before the Land Acquisition Officer/Collector under Section 5A of the Act against the proposed acquisition, but the Land Acquisition Officer without considering the objections and without providing opportunity of personal hearing as provided for under Section 5A of the Act recommended acquisition of land to the State Government, which issued notification under Section 6(1) of the Act and the same was published in the newspaper "Dainik Bhaskar" on 9.4.2006, whereby the land mentioned in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act was sought to be acquired.