Appearing for the petitioners, advocates Gaurav Datta, Srishti S. Sharma and Anushka Gupta argued that the authorities had initiated the acquisition process without conducting the mandatory Social Impact Assessment (SIA). They further contended that objections filed by affected landowners under Section 15 of the 2013 Act were not duly considered.

Additional Advocate-General Satjot Chahal accepted notice on behalf of the state.

The Bench directed that the matter be heard along with a related petition on October 1 and ordered that the interim protection granted in the connected case would also apply to the present petitioners.

The related petition was filed by Abhinav Bindra and another petitioner. In that matter, a Division Bench of Justice Alka Sarin and Justice Ramesh Chander Dimri had earlier directed: “Meanwhile, passing of the award qua the petitioners shall remain stayed.”

By extending that interim order to the present petitioners, the Bench made it clear that no award could be passed against them until further orders.

Legal experts said the award is a crucial stage in land acquisition proceedings. It is the formal document that determines the market value of the land, final compensation, solatium and its apportionment among landowners. It also completes a key step in the acquisition process and paves the way for vesting of land in the government.

The petitioners argued that proceeding with the acquisition without deciding their statutory objections would adversely affect their property rights. By staying the award, the High Court has ensured that their challenge to the acquisition proceedings is not rendered infructuous before the legality of the process is examined.

The interim protection is limited to restraining the authorities from passing the award against the petitioners and will remain in force until further orders. The next hearing is scheduled for October 1.