(1) LEAVE granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. (2) THE appellants who are accused in a case under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 filed a writ petition before a learned Judge of the Patna High Court for quashing its proceeding on the ground that a licence was not required by an oil miller under the provisions of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 for breach of which they were being prosecuted. In support of their contention, they relied upon a judgment of another learned Judge of the Patna High Court in Parsuram Prasad v. State of Bihar. The learned Single Judge, however, disagreed with the view expressed in Parsuram and observed as under: "Now coming to the decision of this Court as quoted above regarding dal mill owner, I am quite aware that as per judicial discipline and decorum, I am bound by that decision. But it appears that the disputed points have not been placed in their proper perspective before the learned Single Judge." (3) SINCE the learned Single Judge was fully aware that he was bound by that decision, it was desirable, in the fitness of things to refer the matter to a Division Bench to set at rest the points on which the learned Judge had joined issue. On this score alone, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the High Court with a request to the learned Chief Justice to constitute a Bench of not less than two Judges to hear the writ petition filed by the appellants. (4) THE appeal is thus disposed of.