Nagendra Prasad Singh, J.

Petitioners in these writ applications have questioned the validity of the Bihar Control of Grimes Ordinance, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance) and a prayer has been made on their behalf for quashing the notices issued to them by the respective District Magistrates in purported exercise of the powers conferred on them by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Ordinance. According to the petitioners, as the Ordinance itself is ultra vires the notices issued to them amount to exercise of power without any authority in law. As common question of law is involved in all these writ applications they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The preamble of the said Ordinance states the object thereof “to make special provisions for the control and suppression of antisocial elements with a view to maintenance of public order”. “Anti-social element” has been defined under section 2 (c) as follows:

“(c) ‘Anti Social element’ means a person who-

(1) either by himself or as a member of or leader of a gang, habitually commits or attempts to commit or abets the commission of offences punishable under Chapter XVI or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code :

(ii) habitually commits or abets the commission of offences, under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 : or

(iii) who by words or otherwise promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds or religion, race language caste or community or any other grounds whatsoever, feelings or enmity or hatred between different religions, racial or language groups or caste or communities, or

(iv) has been round habitually passing indecent remarks to, or teasing women of girls, or

(v) who has been convicted of an offence under Section 25, 26, 27 28, or 29 of the Arms Act, of 1959”.

3. Sub-section (1) or section 3 provides that when it appears to the District Magistrate [a] that any person is anti-social clement, and [b] that his movements or acts in the district or any part there of are causing or are calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or property or that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is engaged in commission of any offence punishable under Chapter XVI or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code or certain other Acts mentioned therein or abetment of such offences, he shall by notice in writing inform him of the general nature of the material allegations against him and shall give him a reasonable opportunity of tendering an explanation against them. In view of sub-section (2) section 3, the person against whom a notice is issued has a right to consult and be defended by a counsel and has to be given reasonable opportunity of examining himself or examining any other witness. Under subsection 3 of section 3, the District Magistrate on being satisfied that the conditions specie filed in sub-section 1 of section 3 exist, he may by order in writing.

(a) direct him to remove himself outside the district or part thereof, as the case may be, by such route, if any, and within such time as may be specified in the order and to resist from entering the district on the specified put thereof, until, the expiry of such period, not exceeding six months as may be specified in the order:

(b) (i) require such person to notify his movements or to report himself or to do both, in such manner, at such time and to such authority or person as may be specified in the order,

(ii) prohibit or restrict possession or use by him of any such article as may be specified in the order,

(iii) direct him otherwise to conduct himself in such manner as may be specified in the order, until the expiry of such period, not exceeding six months, as may be specified in the order.”

Sub-section (4) of section 3 vests power in the District Magistrate under certain contingency to issue warrant of arrest against the person concerned during the pendency of the enquiry, who may be released on executing bond or may be detained in cus