JUDGMENT M.P. Saxena, J. - Ganga Prasad has filed this revision application against the judgment and order dated 15-3-1980 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura, dismissing his appeal and confirming his conviction under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- awarded thereunder, in default of payment of fine he was sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment. 2. According to the prosecution the revisionist was found selling or exposing for sale 'Laddus of Bundi' allegedly prepared in ground nut oil. The Food inspector purchased samples of those 'laddus' and sent them for analysis. the Public Analyst found that the 'ladaus' contained prohibited coal tar dye and metanil yellow, use of which was prohibited. Therefore, the laddus were held to be adulterated. The revisionist was sent up for trial. 3. One of the points pressed from his side was that he was summarily tried by Shri M.K. Sengal, C.J.M. Mathura who was not specially empowered to do so and his trial was wholly illegal. The learned Sessions Judge negatived n by observing that law provides summary trial and Sri Sengal was specially empowered to do so. According to him, he was invested with the summary powers and no objection could be raised. The learned counsel for the revisionist has reiterated this argument and in my judgment with some force. Section 16-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 all offences under sub-section (I) of Section 16 shall be tried in a summary way by a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government or by a Metropolitan Magistrate. In the instant case there is no controversy that Shri Sengal was a C.J.M. Mathura. He might have been specially empowered to try cases under the Penal Code in a summary manner but there is nothing on the record to show that he was specially empowered by the State Government to try cases under the Prevention of food Adulteration Act in this manner. It is needless to say that Section 16-A of the Act relates to a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class. It is needless to say that Section 16-A of the Act relates to a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class. Every C.J.M. is also a Magistrate of the First Class and requires to be specially empowered if he wants to try a case under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in a summary manner. In this case the learned Sessions Judge has not referred to any such notification by which Sri Sengal may have been specially empowered by the State Government to try such cases in a summary manner. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the revisionist has brought to my notice a judgment of the learned Sessions Judge dated 30-11-1979 in Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1979 in which he had held that Sri Sengal was never specially authorised by the State Government to try cases of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in this manner. He might have been authorised under section 250 Cr. P.C. but he could not be deemed to have been authorised to try cases under Act 37 of 1934 in a summary manner. This question arose in the case of Ram Chandra v. State, 1980 (I) FAC 334 in which it was held that only those First Class Magistrates can try the case under section 16 of the P F. Act who have been specially empowered in that respect by the State Government. In the instant case there being no such empowerment in favour of Sri Sengal he could not have tried the revisionist in a summary manner. The trial has been wholly illegal. 4. Accordingly the revision application is allowed and the judgments and orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge and the C.J.M. are set aside. The case is sent back to the court of the C.J M. concerned for trying the revisionist in accordance with law i.e. in a regular manner. The revisionist is directed to appear before the C.J.M. concerned on 7-9-1981. The record of the case may be sent to his court immediately.