The Supreme Court held that circle rates should not be the sole criterion for determining compensation under the Land Acquisition Act; the authority must use objective criteria.

1. Leave granted. Whether the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court could, while deciding the writ petitions filed by the respondents for quashing the acquisition of their land, pass interim orders and compel Respondent 1 Government of NCT of Delhi to issue notification making circle rates as the prime criteria for determination of the compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the 1894 Act") and then direct that the same shall be made applicable to the acquisitions made prior to issue of notification is the question which arises for consideration in these appeals.

2. The land of the respondents was acquired for construction of Depot, staff quarters and TSS of Inderlok Mundka Corridor of Delhi MRTS Project, Phase II. The notification under S.4 was issued on 7-6-2007 and the declaration made under S.6 was published on 23-10-2007. After issuing notice under S.9 and S.10, the Land Acquisition Collector passed the award and fixed the market value of the acquired land.

3. The respondents challenged the acquisition proceedings in Writ Petitions Nos. 2109 and 5480 of 2008 and prayed for the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue a writ of certiorari / mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions thereby quashing the Notification issued under S.4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 7-6-2007, S.6 of the LA Act and S.17 of the LA Act dated 23-10-2007 and the proceedings and award, if any passed thereunder in respect of the residential properties of the petitioners as detailed in Para 2 of the petition declaring the same as illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires;
(ii) In alternative issue a writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to allot the petitioners residential plots of same area in the nearby authorised residential colony, in case the acquisition is held to be valid and to give appropriate compensation to the petitioners at the basis of auction reserved price of DDA, in the nearby area or in tune of user of the property for commercial purpose by DMRC;
(iii) Issue a writ of certiorari / mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions thereby denotifying the land of the petitioners with the directions to hand over the possession of their respective plots to them along with damages;
(iv) Costs be also awarded;
(v) Pass any other or further order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents."

4. On 2-4-2008, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 2-4-2008 (Del), the High Court directed the Land Acquisition Collector to deposit 80% of the amount of compensation in the Court. Thereafter, the writ petitioners were permitted to withdraw 80% of the compensation. On 1-10-2008, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 1-10-2008 (Del), 17-2-2009, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 17-2-2009 (Del), 26-4-2009, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 26-4-2009 (Del), 21-5-2010, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 21-5-2010 (Del), 9-7-2010, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 9-7-2010 (Del), 24-9-2010, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 24-9-2010 (Del), 26-11-2010, Ajay Kumar v. Govt (NCT of Delhi), WP(C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 26-11-2010 (Del) and 4-2-2011, Ajay Kumar v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi),WP (C) No. 2109 of 2008, order dated 4-2-2011 (Del), the High Court passed the following orders: 4.1. Order dated 1-10-2008, Ajay Kumar v. Govt.