JUDGMENT : 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs: “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that record of the case may kindly be called for and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:- i. the impugned award dated 25.07.2022, passed by the learned Competent Authority-cum-Sub Divisional Officer, Bhupalsagar, District Chittorgarh in Case No.01/2022/685 (An.1) and the consequential letter dated 25.07.2022 (An.2) issued by the Competent Authority to the Sr. Divisional Engineer, North-Western Railway, Ajmer and the letter dt. 13.12.2022 (An.12) may kindly be quashed and set aside and the entire so called land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents may kindly be declared void ab initio and the respondents may be restrained from taking over possession of the land in question i.e. 0.06 hectare of land out of Khasra No.1511 of village Kankarwa, Tehsil Bhupalsagar, District Chittorgarh; ii. during the pendency of the writ petition the effect and operation of the impugned award and letter dated 25.07.2022 (An.1 & An.2) may kindly be stayed; iii. any other appropriate order/relief as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioner. v. the writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed throughout with exemplary costs and compensation, for initiating absolutely illegal land acquisition proceedings – in the absence of a notified special railway project – to harass and humiliate the petitioner, may also be awarded to the petitioner in the tune of Rs.50,000/-” 2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that the petitioner is a lawful khatedar of the land comprising Khasra No. 1511, situated at Village, Kankarwa, Tehsil Bhupalsagar, District Chittorgarh admeasuring 1.39 hectare. The Ministry of Railways (Railway Board), New Delhi issued a notification in December 2021 seeking to acquire the land admeasuring 0.06 hectare of the land in question for execution of the Special Railway Project (Bridge on level Crossing No.139), Bhupalsagar-Fatehnagar. 2.1. The Senior Divisional Engineer (South), North Western Railways, Ajmer issued a letter dated 18.09.2021, wherein it was stated that the respondent no.3-Sub-Divisional Officer has been appointed as Land Acquisition Officer for the land acquisition proceedings in question. 2.2. 2.1. The Senior Divisional Engineer (South), North Western Railways, Ajmer issued a letter dated 18.09.2021, wherein it was stated that the respondent no.3-Sub-Divisional Officer has been appointed as Land Acquisition Officer for the land acquisition proceedings in question. 2.2. Thereafter the respondent no.3 addressed a letter dated 28.03.2022 to the Senior Divisional Engineer, North Western Railways, Ajmer, wherein it was stated that in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2013’), the notifications have to be published in two local newspapers. In the meantime, the petitioner had already filed a revenue suit under Section 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chittorgarh in the year 2018. 2.3. The Competent Authority-cum-Sub Divisional Officer vide order dated 25.07.2022 in Case No. 01/2022 (Railway Ministry Vs. Smt. Vandana), granted compensation to the tune of Rs.1,69,290/- to the petitioner in lieu of the acquisition in question. Thereafter, the Competent Authority wrote a letter to the Senior Divisional Engineer (South), North-Western Railways, Ajmer for making the necessary payments and taking over the possession of the land in question from the petitioner. 2.4. The petitioner received communication dated 13.12.2022 from the Land Acquisition Officer for collecting the compensation of Rs. 1,69,290/- in lieu of the acquisition in question. 2.5. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order dated 25.07.2022, letter dated 25.07.2022 passed by the Competent Authority-cum-Sub Divisional Officer and the letter dated 13.12.2022, on the ground, amongst others, that the same were passed/issued without hearing the petitioner, he has preferred this petition claiming the afore-quoted reliefs. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have acquired the land in question without first notifying a “Special Railways Project” as contemplated by Section 2 (37A) of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1989’). 3.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the notification under Section 20A of the Act of 1989 was published in two local newspaper of the District Chittorgarh, and the notification under Section 20E of the Act of 1989 was published in two local newspapers of the District Udaipur. As per learned counsel, it is extremely intriguing, inasmuch as the phrase ‘local newspapers’ can only have one connotation in respect of any land acquisition proceeding. 3.2. As per learned counsel, it is extremely intriguing, inasmuch as the phrase ‘local newspapers’ can only have one connotation in respect of any land acquisition proceeding. 3.2. Learned counsel also submitted that the impugned action of the respondents clearly reflects a falsehood to the effect that the publication under the Act of 2013 was completed, and that, the notification was not affixed at a conspicuous public place, and therefore, the entire action of the respondents is against the principles of the natural justice and violative of the Constitution of India. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, while opposing the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the entire proceedings for acquisition of the land in question have been undertaken in accordance with the provision of the Act and the Rules and compensation to the tune of Rs.1,69,290/- was also awarded to the petitioner. 4.1. It was further submitted that as per the extra ordinary gazette notification no.3067 dated 13.08.2021, a Special Railway Project was notified, and for that said purpose, the land in question was sought to be acquired for construction of the bridge of the railways, and that, it is a public project; thus, there is no illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned action on the part of the respondents. 4.2. It was also submitted that the notification was published in local newspapers (Dainik Bhaskar and Rajasthan Patrika) of the District Udaipur Edition on 20.05.2022. The earlier notification was published in the local newspapers of District Chittorgarh on 18.02.2022. 4.3. It was further submitted that the respondents invited the claim(s)/objection(s), but no such claim/objection was ever received by the Competent Authority, and thus, thereafter the Competent Authority proceeded to award the compensation in accordance with law. 4.4. It was also submitted that the compensation amount has been already deposited with the Competent Authority on 21.11.2022, but despite the same, the possession of the land in question has still not been handed over to the respondents no.1 and 2. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record of the case. 6. This Court observes that the respondents sought to acquire the petitioner’s land in question for Special Railway Project, which is clearly reflected from the proceedings in question, and for the said purpose, the Sub-Divisional officer was appointed as Land Acquisition Officer (Competent Authority). 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record of the case. 6. This Court observes that the respondents sought to acquire the petitioner’s land in question for Special Railway Project, which is clearly reflected from the proceedings in question, and for the said purpose, the Sub-Divisional officer was appointed as Land Acquisition Officer (Competent Authority). After completion of the proceedings, the Competent Authority passed the impugned order dated 25.07.2022, and awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs.1,69,290/- to the petitioner, in lieu of the acquisition in question. 7. This Court further observes that the land in question was sought to be acquired by the respondents for the purpose of construction of bridge under the Special Railways Projects as notified in terms of Section 2 (37A) of the Act of 1989. This Court also observes that the Ministry of Railways vide gazette notification dated 13.08.2021, notified the Special Railway Project, and the same was done in terms of Section 2 (37A) of the Act of 1989, and thus, suffers from no illegality or arbitrariness. Relevant portion of the said notification is reproduced as hereunder:- ^^jsy ea=ky; mRrj if'pe jsyos ¼bathfu;jhax foHkkx½ vf/klwpuk t;iqj] 12 vxLr 2021 dk-vk- 3315¼v½-& dsUnzh; ljdkj] jsy vf/kfu;e] 1989 dh /kkjk 2 ds [kaM ¼37 d½ ds }kjk iznRr 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, bl vf/kfu;e ds jkti= esa izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls uhps nh xbZ lkj.kh ds LraHk ¼3½ esa mfYyf[kr jkT; esa mDr lkj.kh ds LraHk ¼2½ esa ;Fkk&mfYyf[kr ifj;kstuk dks fuEufyf[kr fo'ks"k jsy ifj;kstuk ds :i esa vf/klwfpr djrh gSA lkj.kh fo'ks"k jsy ifj;kstuk Øe-la- ifj;kstuk dk uke jkT;@la?kjkT; {ks= 1- vtesj eaMy & leikjksa ij fupys lM+d iqy ¼65 vnn½ jktLFkku ¼bZ-Qk-la- m-i-js-&,pD;w0bath¼,y,e½@25@2021½ lqjsUnz dqekj caly] eq[; ifj;kstuk funs'kd@LVs'ku fodkl** 8. This Court also observes that the Competent Authority awarded the compensation to the petitioner as per the provisions of the Act of 2013. This Court further observes that the Special Railway Project in question is an absolute necessity for the public at large and the petitioner was also awarded the compensation in lieu of such acquisition. 9. This Court further observes that in pursuance of the impugned order, the respondents no.1 and 2 deposited the compensation amount to the tune of Rs.1,69,290/- with the Competent Authority on 21.11.2022, and therefore, there is nothing left to be reconsidered in the present case. 10. 9. This Court further observes that in pursuance of the impugned order, the respondents no.1 and 2 deposited the compensation amount to the tune of Rs.1,69,290/- with the Competent Authority on 21.11.2022, and therefore, there is nothing left to be reconsidered in the present case. 10. Thus, in light of the aforesaid observations and looking into the factual matrix of the present case, this Court does not find it a fit case so as to grant any relief to the petitioner in the present petition. 11. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. All pending applications stand disposed of.