The residents at Dandeavado, Chinchinim abutting NH66 are disappointed. The arrogance of authorities asking for private survey for verification is outrageous. After marking, the stones have been relocated at various places. The residents had construction beyond acquired land. The readjustment in fixing stones appears to be favouring vested interests where the Govt has already paid compensation. Will the compensation be recalled? In SN 420/6, the new stone is fixed more than 2 metres away from existing stone. When it was pointed out it was explained as alignment mark. Compensation was paid based on old marked stone what is the need for new marking? In SN 421/1, a written observation was made by the authorities. At first it was fixed by new stone 2 metres away. It was suddenly removed. Shifting the alignment mark several times a new stone replaces the old one in exactly the same spot, but the opposite stone has neither been demarcated or fixed as yet. At many points residents have disputed as new stones are not as per old acquisition and marking on the ground are at variance with plans.
