These petitions are filed challenging the Notifications issued under Section 28(1) and 28(4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for brevity ‘the Act’) and to quash the Resolution passed by the 2nd respondent-KIADB thereby fixing the market value of the land acquired at Rs.12 lakhs per acre; Land is notified for the purpose of 5th respondent-Gulbarga Cement Company Limited/A Private Ltd., Company.

2. The petitioners are the owners in possession of various survey numbers of Kiranagi village in Gulbarga District. Their lands totaling about 71 acres is notified for acquisition. Arguments was addressed on both sides on merits of the case, however after conclusion of arguments a Memo dated 6.3.2017 was filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri. Shivakumar Kalloor, in the Court Hall which reads thus:

“In the above writ petitions, the petitioners are restricting their claim to the market value fixed by Advisory Committee with accrued interest (Annexure-G) as per Apex Court order. The petitioners may kindly be paid compensation amount as per the Advisory Committee Resolution Annexure-G Rs.16 lakhs with interest without prejudice to his rights questioning acquisition, in the ends of justice.”

3. In that view of the matter, now this Court is left with the following question:

Whether the price fixed by the Advisory Committee is binding on the State, if not binding, which is the Forum for the petitioners to redress their grievance?

4. It is not in dispute between the parties that the Notification under Section 3(1) of the Act (Annexure-B) was published in the Gazette on 24.07.2012 declaring the several survey numbers of lands identified at Ferozabad, Somanathahalli and Kiranagi villages of Gulbarga Taluka, Gulbarga District as Industrial Area by the Ministry of Trade and Commerce. Notification under Section 28 (1) of the Act was also issued notifying proposal to acquire the above lands. Vide Annexure-D dated 21.08.2012 objections from the concerned/owners of the lands was called for under Section 29 (2) of the Act.

5. The petitioners herein filed their objection statements to the said Notification with the Special Land Acquisition Officer.

6. In pursuance of Section 29 (2) of the Act the Price Advisory Committee (for short ‘Advisory Committee’) was constituted. The meeting of the Advisory Committee was held on 31.10.2013. To work out the market value of the lands by agreement of the beneficiary and the land owners. The Committee was headed by the District Commissioner, Members and Special Invitees and the SLAO as Conviner. After much deliberation the Deputy Commissioner announced that he would recommend 15 lakh rupees per acre and additional 1 lakh rupees in respect of the land laying within 100 meters from Jewargi Shahabad State High Way. However, said price was not acceptable to the land owners. In the 326th meeting of the Board held on 30.11.2013 it was recorded that compensation was agreed at the rate of rupees twelve lakhs per acre. Now the attack is on scaling down the compensation to 12 lakhs rupees per acre from 16 lakhs that too without notice to the petitioners.

7. Sri. Shivakumar Kallur, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that this is an Order passed behind the back of the petitioners. The petitioners have received notice from the 3rd respondent/S.L.A.O. to receive the compensation @ Rs.12 lakhs per acre which is not agreeable to them. In fact, the land value in the area is Rs.25 lakhs per acre since the land is situated abutting to the Highway. If the respondent is not agreeable to the consensus arrived in the Advisory Committee’s meeting i.e., Rs.16 lakhs per acre with interest, then the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed and fresh acquisition under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for brevity ‘The New Act, 2013) has to be initiated.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 Sri. B.B. Patil, submits tha