The Supreme Court on Monday, October 26, 2026, reserved its judgment on the challenge brought by Shri Saryu Nagar Vikas Samiti to the acquisition of land in Ayodhya, after hearing arguments on social impact assessment and on the safeguards available under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, LawChakra reported. The Court will deliver its verdict on a later date.

Source: LawChakra

In court, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati argued, "How can there be no hotels in a place like Ayodhya?" adding that "the whole world is looking at this place for the kind of development and pilgrimage." Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, for the petitioner, countered, "Don't take multi-cropping lands for it. You can't take multi-cropping lands for it," and asked, "So let the farmers starve?" The CJI-led bench reserved orders in the case, LiveLaw reported from the hearing.

Source: LiveLaw

The Samiti, acting through its president Awadhesh Kumar Singh, has questioned acquisitions carried out for housing schemes in Ayodhya. The arguments centred on whether landowners were entitled to a social impact assessment and to the compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement protections that the 2013 Act provides, LawChakra reported.

The dispute concerns schemes framed by the Uttar Pradesh Awas Evam Vikas Parishad (Housing Board) in Ayodhya and acquisitions made for them under the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, through notifications issued from 2020 onwards. Landowners argued before the Allahabad High Court that the State had chosen the 1965 law over the 2013 Act, which carries higher compensation, mandatory rehabilitation and resettlement, and a social impact assessment before acquisition.

In April 2026, a Division Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla at Lucknow stayed the acquisition proceedings, ordered status quo, and observed that prima facie the 1965 route appeared less beneficial to landowners, LawChakra reported. The Supreme Court's reserved verdict will now decide which legal regime governs the acquisitions.