High Court writ jurisdiction cannot affirm invalid administrative orders setting aside awards

High Courts exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 err egregiously when upholding executive orders that arbitrarily set aside valid statutory land acquisition awards. Judicial review requires High Courts to scrupulously examine whether administrative orders cancelling awards satisfy statutory authority and procedural requirements. High Courts cannot endorse blanket executive cancellation of acquisition awards when the underlying challenge was restricted to specific collusive land owners. Affirming administrative overreach that deprives untainted land owners of statutory compensation without hearing or cause constitutes a severe failure of judicial oversight. Writ courts must invalidate executive orders that suspend or recall statutory arbitral awards in the absence of explicit statutory review powers. Erroneous High Court judgments affirming invalid administrative orders must be set aside in appellate proceedings to restore statutory compensation awards. Consequently, appellate courts will intervene to rectify High Court errors and enforce payment of full land acquisition compensation to untainted applicants. (Niraj Jain v. Competent Authority-cum-Additional Collector, Jagdalpur & Ors. | 2026 INSC 86)