M.P.Varma, J.

1. In all the six revision applications referred to above a common question of law has been posed at the Bar. As such, with the consent of the parties all the applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.

2. ft was on the order of the Collector, Purnea that officials of the Supply Department raided the business premises of the petitioners and on detecting some irregularities instituted several cases against each one of them. In course of the raid, articles belonging to them were also seized and each one of them was noticed to show cause why the articles seized be not confiscated. The notices were issued by the Collector under Sec. 6-B, of the Essential Commodities Act. 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The copies of the notices have been attached with each one of the applications as annexure 2. It is stated that each one of the petitioners filed show-cause but the learned Collector after hearing the parties was pleased to confiscate the articles seized, Copies of the orders of the Collector, passed in each case have been filed along with the application marked annexure-3.

3. The petitioners being aggrieved by the or