N.Imam, J.

1. This is an application in revision against the order of the learned Magistrate who has passed an ex parte order under Sec. 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 300.00 a month by way of maintenance to the opposite party.

2. The point taken before me is that the fearned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass the ex parte order without service of notice as contemplated under Section 68 read with Sec. 69 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It transpires that in the Bombay Government Gazette, dated 11-4-1957, the notice of the application and the date of the hearing of the case had been published. This, of course, is no notice as contemplated under Sec. 68 read with Sec. 69 of the Code unless it can be shown that the State Government had provided that notice shall be served in this manner. I asked the learned lawyer for the opposite party whether any such provision had been made by the State Government of Bombay, and I was definitely informed that no such provision had been made. It is thus clear that mere publication of the notice in the Bombay Government Gazette cannot serve the purpose of notice as understood under Se