publication in the Official Gazette and in two daily newspapers circulating in that locality of which at least one shall be in the regional language. Subsection (2) provides for the power to conduct survey, etc. in the property to be acquired and the proviso therein stipulates that “no person shall enter into any building or upon any enclosed Court or garden attached to a dwelling-house without previously giving such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention to do so.” Therefore, the service of notice under Section 45(1) of the Act can only be a notice under sub-section (2) of Section 4 and not in respect of a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. Therefore, the said contention cannot be accepted and the acquisition proceedings on that ground cannot fail. Apart from that, going by the counter affidavit, notices under Rule 7(1) of the Land Acquisition Rules were affixed on the doors of House Nos.200 and 220, as the petitioner is not residing in the site address and it is explained by the learned Govt. Pleader that the said buildings are the buildings in the acquired property. Therefore, no irregularity can be attached to the same. I am fortified in this view by a decision of the Supreme Court in Mahadev v. Sub Divisional
