ORDER Daniels, J. - This is an application for revision of an order passed by Babu Shri Krishan Kumar Sahib, Magistrate, First Class, in a case under Act XIII of 1859, as amended by Act XII of 1920. The applicant made a complaint against Ram Nandan u/s 2 of that Act on the ground that Ram Nandan had received an advance of Rs. 70 and had abandoned his work without re-paying the advance. The learned Magistrate held that the contract was that Rs. 4-5-0 of the advance of Rs. 70 should be paid to Ram Nandan, and that the balance should be paid to Narotam Sahu to whom Ram Randan, already owed Rs. 65-11-0. No money was paid to Narotam Sahu, and accordingly Ram Nandan ceased to work for the applicant. On these facts the learned Magistrate found that the charge made was vexatious and accordingly ordered that the applicant should pay Rs. 20 as compensation. 2. The facts as found by the learned Magistrate are not in dispute before me. It is, however, urged that the provisions of Section 2B of the Act have not been complied with. This section provides that in cases where the Magistrate, considers the complaint to have been frivolous or vexatious, he should call upon the complainant to show cause why an order for compensation should not be passed against him. If after having considered such explanation he considers that compensation should be awarded to the defendant the Magistrate is to make an order awarding compensation, and to give his reasons therefor. 3. In the present case it is clear that this procedure has not been followed. The order for compensation is an integral part of the judgment, and it seems clear from the record that the first intimation which the complainant had was the order directing that compensation should be paid. Nor are any definite reasons given for making this order, although it is true that a perusal of the judgment as a whole cleanly shows the reasons which must have led the learned Magistrate to his decision. It is clear that the order complained against, being made without the complainant having had an opportunity of objecting, and not being accompanied by a clear statement of the reasons which induced the Magistrate to make the order, is illegal. It is clear that the order complained against, being made without the complainant having had an opportunity of objecting, and not being accompanied by a clear statement of the reasons which induced the Magistrate to make the order, is illegal. Accordingly u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, I send the record to the Hon'ble High Court for orders, with a recommendation that the order directing the payment of Rs. 20 compensation be quashed. ORDER 4. This is a Reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Benares in a case under the Workman's Breach of Contract Act, 1859, as amended by Act XII of 1920. It is admitted that the Magistrate omitted, before ordering the complainant to pay compensation u/s 2B of the Act, to call on him to show cause. I accordingly set aside the order of compensation passed and direct the Magistrate to do now what he should have done in the first instance, namely, to call upon the complainant to show cause why he should not be ordered to pay compensation. The Magistrate will then pass final orders after considering any cause that may have been shown. The amount of compensation, if already deposited, will remain in deposit pending the decision of the case.