JUDGMENT M. Wahajuddin, J. - This is a revision u/s 397/401, Code of Criminal Procedure, praying that the orders of the courts below be set set aside and petrol and diesel oil belonging to the applicants be released in their favour. 2. It would appear that initially a case under Sections 6, 7 and 11 of U. P. Sale of Motor Spirit and Diesel Oil Taxation Act, 1939, was registered. The diesel oil and petrol involved were taken into custody in that connection. Later, Sri P.K. Agrawal, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lalganj, lodged a report u/s 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, in pursuance of which a case u/s 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act was also registered. After such a case was registered, the very Magistrate has passed the impugned order directing that the diesel and petrol, so recovered, be handed over to M/s. Radha Kishan Bimal Kumar, an authorised petroleum dealer, with instructions for sale thereof on control price. 3. The appeal against such order was also dismissed. The order was assailed on a number of grounds, but during arguments the main grounds urged are that while diesel and petrol both are essential commodities, as defined in the Essential Commodites Act, there is an order regulating the sale and storage of diesel alone and not of petrol, so under the Essential Commodities Act storing of petrol may not be an offence, even if it is an offence under any provision of law. it is, further, urged that the petrol and diesel were seized in a raid in another connection, namely, the raid concerned with Spirit and Diesel Oil Taxation Act, 1939, and not under the Essential Commodities Act. Thirdly, it is urged that the principles of natural justice have been defeated and there has been an abuse of the process of law, as the very Magistrate who lodged the report u/s 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and got a case registered has passed the impugned order. The applicants have been prejudiced on account of the same and the matter should have been heard and disposed of by some other Magistrate. It is note worthy that the order of the Magistrate does not indicate that any notice was given and the applicants were heard. The applicants have been prejudiced on account of the same and the matter should have been heard and disposed of by some other Magistrate. It is note worthy that the order of the Magistrate does not indicate that any notice was given and the applicants were heard. While disposing of the appeal, the appellate court has observed that actually the applicants should appear before the Magistrate Sri P.K. Agrawal and take various pleas and any order of the disposal of the petrol and diesel on control price without forfeiture would not materially prejudice the applicants, when the direction is for sale on control price. It seems that the applicants did not appear before Sri P.K. Agrawal having an apprehension in their mind that they will not have a fair hearing before Sri P.K. Agrawal, when the case under the Essential Commodities Act itself was registered on his report for registering such a case. 4. I feel that the revision can be better disposed of by dealing with the third point alone. The practice of not addressing the lower court on factual and legal pleas and then raising such points directly before this Court is not to be encouraged. So I would not enter into the consideration of the first two points and leave it for the court concerned itself to consider those points also including the point whether the District Magistrate can act u/s 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act and that provision would be attracted. 5. The maxim is well settled that one cannot be a witness of fact as well as sit as a judge to decide it. When Sri P.K. Agrawal himself got a case registered u/s 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, the applicants could not have a fair hearing before him on the point whether the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act would, at all, be attracted. There is one more illegality in the order passed by Sri P.K. Agrawal. He has stated in his order that he is passing the impugned order under the verbal insturctions of the District Magistrate. This he, obviously, could not do. Any order u/s 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act is akin to judicial order and an appeal is also contemplated. There is one more illegality in the order passed by Sri P.K. Agrawal. He has stated in his order that he is passing the impugned order under the verbal insturctions of the District Magistrate. This he, obviously, could not do. Any order u/s 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act is akin to judicial order and an appeal is also contemplated. When that is the position, Sri P.K. Agrawal had to exercise his own mind and to take his own decision and he could not have passed any order on any verbal instructions of the District Magistrate in this manner. The impugned orders are, therefore, perse bad and illegal. 6. Allowing this revision, I set aside the order dated 13-11-80 of Sri P.K. Agrawal as well as the order dated 3-2-81 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh, in appeal, and direct that if any proceeding u/s 6-A is desired to be taken, the proceeding should be taken and heard by any Magistrate empowered to act u/s 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, other than Sri P.K. Agrawal or the then District Magistrate, who gave verbal instructions to Sri P.K. Agrawal. I may also observe that it may be proper to give an opportunity to the applicants to raise whatever pleas they want to take before such Magistrate.