provide any opportunity for the objectors to put
forth their objections against the compulsory acquisition. By an
amending Act, Section 5A was inserted ... public purpose could file the objections.
Section 5A (2) mandated the Collector to give an opportunity to the
objector of being heard and then submit
provide any opportunity for the objectors to put
forth their objections against the compulsory acquisition. By an
amending Act, Section 5A was inserted ... public purpose could file the objections.
Section 5A (2) mandated the Collector to give an opportunity to the
objector of being heard and then submit
provide any opportunity for the objectors to put
forth their objections against the compulsory acquisition. By an
amending Act, Section 5A was inserted ... public purpose could file the objections.
Section 5A (2) mandated the Collector to give an opportunity to the
objector of being heard and then submit
present
case admittedly the objections were invited.
Petitioners had raised their objections and
after hearing them the objections were turned
down by the Collector Satara ... accepted
proposals given by the Collector and also considered
the objections of the objectors. It cannot be said
that the exercise done by the Divisional
objections
were not significantly different from the objections raised by NSEL
or FTIL. All such objections were considered in substantial detail.
None of the objectors ... have pointed out that any significant
objections of theirs, remained to be considered. None of the
objectors have pleaded or established any prejudice. They rely
objections
were not significantly different from the objections raised by NSEL
or FTIL. All such objections were considered in substantial detail.
None of the objectors ... have pointed out that any significant
objections of theirs, remained to be considered. None of the
objectors have pleaded or established any prejudice. They rely
Shrawan
Pendholkar, however filed objections to the said Change Report. The
main grievance raised by the objectors was that they had not
received the notice ... learned ACC, Chandrapur, objector no.1
Rishidev Choudhary and objector no.2 Dhanji Shah examined
themselves in support of their objections. As against it, appellant
present
case admittedly the objections were invited.
Petitioners had raised their objections and
after hearing them the objections were turned
down by the Collector Satara ... accepted
proposals given by the Collector and also considered
the objections of the objectors. It cannot be said
that the exercise done by the Divisional
objections
were not significantly different from the objections raised by NSEL
or FTIL. All such objections were considered in substantial detail.
None of the objectors ... have pointed out that any significant
objections of theirs, remained to be considered. None of the
objectors have pleaded or established any prejudice. They rely
objections
were not significantly different from the objections raised by NSEL
or FTIL. All such objections were considered in substantial detail.
None of the objectors ... have pointed out that any significant
objections of theirs, remained to be considered. None of the
objectors have pleaded or established any prejudice. They rely
