The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Appellant, a land owner, challenging the High Court order which had set aside the land acquisition award and arbitral award in his favour. The case involved acquisition of land in Chhattisgarh for a Special Rail Project. An inquiry was initiated alleging excessive compensation awarded to some land owners in collusion with revenue officials. Based on the inquiry report, FIR was registered against competent authority, arbitrator, revenue officials and beneficiaries. The Railways filed a writ petition impleading only five land owners out of 550 total beneficiaries. The High Court set aside the award for all land owners. The Supreme Court held that setting aside of award for some beneficiaries on grounds of unjust enrichment does not ipso facto result in entire award being set aside for all. The appellant was not proceeded against in the inquiry or FIR. The Court restored the arbitral award in favour of the appellant.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Appellant, a land owner, against the order of the High Court which had set aside the land acquisition award and arbitral award in his favour -- The Court held that setting aside of an award on grounds of excessive compensation and unjust enrichment against some land owners does not ipso facto result in the entire award being set aside for all beneficiaries -- The appellant was not proceeded against based on the inquiry report, either for freezing of accounts or as an accused in the FIR -- Only five out of 550 land owners were impleaded in the writ petition filed by the Railways -- The principle of natural justice requires specific allegations against each beneficiary -- The Court set aside the impugned order and restored the arbitral award in favour of the appellant -- Paragraphs 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the High Court, and restored the arbitral award in favour of the appellant. The Court held that the appellant was entitled to the enhanced compensation as determined by the arbitrator.
Citation: 2026 LawText (SC) (01) 74
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. of 2026 (@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 7061 of 2025)
Date of Decision: 2026-01-27
Case Title: Whether the setting aside of an award of compensation for land acquisition, on grounds of it being excessive and resulting in unjust enrichment of some land owners, acting in collusion with the competent authority and the revenue officials, who acted in colourable exercise of powers would ipso facto result in the entire award with respect to the acquisition being set aside
Before Judge: K. Vinod Chandran, J.
Equivalent Citations: 2026 INSC 86
Advocate(s): Mr. Shoeb Alam, Mr. Brijender Chahar, Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Mr. Tushar Mehta
Appellant: Niraj Jain
Respondent: Competent Authority-cum-Additional Collector, Jagdalpur & Ors.
Nature of Litigation: Civil appeal against High Court order setting aside land acquisition award and arbitral award
Remedy Sought: Appellant seeking restoration of arbitral award granting enhanced compensation
Filing Reason: High Court set aside award for all land owners based on allegations against few beneficiaries
Previous Decisions: High Court set aside award dated 12.02.2018 and arbitral award dated 11.07.2019, directed recalculation of compensation, High Court dismissed appeal against writ petition dismissal
Issues: Whether setting aside of award for some beneficiaries on grounds of unjust enrichment ipso facto results in entire award being set aside for all land owners Whether appellant who was not proceeded against in inquiry or FIR can be denied compensation
Submissions/Arguments: Appellant argued no allegations against him, not proceeded against by Railways, only 5 out of 550 land owners impleaded in writ petition Respondents argued pendency of other SLP should keep present appeal in abeyance
Ratio Decidendi: Setting aside of an award on grounds of excessive compensation and unjust enrichment against some beneficiaries does not ipso facto result in the entire award being set aside for all land owners. Principle of natural justice requires specific allegations against each beneficiary. When only few beneficiaries are proceeded against based on inquiry report, other beneficiaries who are not subject to allegations cannot be denied their rightful compensation.
Judgment Excerpts: Whether the setting aside of an award of compensation for land acquisition, on grounds of it being excessive and resulting in unjust enrichment of some land owners, acting in collusion with the competent authority and the revenue officials, who acted in colourable exercise of powers would ipso facto result in the entire award with respect to the acquisition being set aside is the question arising in this appeal The appellant herein was not a land owner who was proceeded against based on the inquiry report, either for the purpose of freezing of account or arrayed as an accused in the FIR lodged Only five were impleaded in the writ petition from amongst the 550 We are of the definite opinion that the award and the arbitral award in favour of the appellant cannot be set aside on the mere ground that the award and the arbitral award in favour of some other land owners were set aside on the ground of unjust enrichment and colourable exercise of powers
Procedural History: Land acquisition for Special Rail Project notified on 31.08.2017 -- Award passed on 12.02.2018 -- Appellant approached arbitrator who granted enhancement on 28.06.2019 -- Inquiry initiated alleging excessive compensation -- FIR registered against officials and beneficiaries -- Railways filed writ petition impleading 5 land owners -- High Court set aside award for all land owners on 10.01.2022 -- Appellant's writ petition dismissed -- Appeal dismissed -- Present appeal before Supreme Court
