Judgment S.B.Sanyal, J. 1. This is an application for quashing an order seizing 90 bags of levy sugar from the custody of the petitioner as well as the order initiating confiscation proceeding under the Essential Commodities Act. 2. Mr. Choudhary, S.N. Mishra drew our attention to Annexure 10, the notice, which does not set out the grounds of proposed confiscation beyond stating that the sugars have been seized for violation of the Essential Commodities Act, which are sought to be confiscated. The petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why it should not be so done. 3. It is now well established in law that for initiating a confiscation proceeding authorities must set out the grounds in order to give an effective opportunity to explain the alleged irregularities. In absence of statements of ground a person is denied a real and effective opportunity to show cause. This is not only the basic principle of natural justice, but also the requirement of section 6B of the Essential Commodities Act. 4. Mr. Abhijit Sinha appearing for the State, however, contended that the petitioner can be served with the grounds on his appearance for which a date has been fixed in the case. He also submitted that the Essential Commodities Act do confer jurisdiction on the authorities to order disposal of articles which are subject to decay till a final order in the confiscation proceeding is passed. In this case admittedly before the order of disposal was made no notice whatsoever was communicated to the possessor of the articles and further no reason has been given why there should be such hurry in disposing of the sugar, which in our opinion, is not of such kind which can decay so soon. 5. Be that as it may, the order of sale of sugar as also the notice for initiating confiscation proceeding are per se, illegal and without jurisdiction for being violative not only the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, but also the principles of natural Justice. 6. We are therefore, constrained to quash Annexures 4 and 10. This order will not, however stand in the way of the respondents to proceed in accordance with law if so advised.