( 1 ) IN this group of four Letters Patent Appeals, we are concerned with the common orders pronounced by the learned-single Judge on 5/08/1987. under which four petitions came to be decided and disposed of. The tour petitions were taken out. by in all 165 petitioners who were engaged in the business of Dyeing, Printing and Manufacturing of Saries at different places in the town of Rajkot. The challenge was posed by them to the notice issued by the respondent-Municipal Commissioner at Annexure-A under the provisions contained in Sec. 376-A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act. 1949. (now. hereinafter referred to as the b. P. M. C. Act ). Learned single Judge has studied the provisions contained under Sec. 376-A of the B. P. M. C. Act. along with the requisition which came to be issued to the petitioners who were before the learned single Judge by taking out four petitions. It appears that. very many contentions were raised in the Memorandum of the Petitions but ultimately the ground which came to be urged before the learned single Judge was in respect of the legality and the validity of the requisition in question, because the only ground which came to be urged before the learned single judge was to the effect that the requisitions have been issued without affording the reasonable opportunity of being heard and therefore, the same were in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned single Judge was of the opinion that. the petitions were required to be dismissed, regard being had to the provisions contained under Sec. 376-A of the B. P. M. C. Act and the contents of the requisition. These four Letters Patent Appeals have been directed against the abovesaid orders;.

( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel Mr. Amit Panchal who appears on behalf of the appellants. wanted to raise several contentions before us. which according to him were duly canvassed in the detailed Memorandum of the Petitions. Learned Counsel wanted to urge before us that the requisitions in question have been based upon no material whatsoever and that, at the relevant time no authority including the Municipal corporation at Rajkot had prescribed or specified the standards for the discharge of the trade effluent coming out of the sari industry. It was an endeavour on the part of the learned Counsel to urge with vehemence that. if the above said aspects. of the matter are to be taken into consideration, then, probably this group of appeals shall have to be allowed and the orders in question shall have to be set aside and the petitions shall have to be allowed in full.

( 3 ) BUT upon the reference to the orders pronounced by the learned single Judge and especially para 14 thereof, it is evident that the solitary contention urged before the learned single Judge was to the effect that the notices/requisitions have been issued without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard and therefore, the said action was in violation of the principles of natural justice. Thus, it would appeal- that the said was the solitary contention which came to he raised before the learned single Judge, and the judicial conscience was called upon to adjudicate upon and decide the said contention alone.

( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel Mr. Panchal urges before us that. when various contentions have been taken in detail in the Memorandum of the Petitions, it would be open for the appellants to urge the said contentions before us. even though not urged before, and not dealt with, by the learned single Judge. We are unable to agree with this contention coming from the learned Counsel for the appellants, for the simple reason that, the voluminous petitions might be containing numerous contentions but ultimately at the time of advancement of the cause before the Court, if only a few of them or only one of them is advanced for the consideration of the judicial conscience and, if the orders are based upon that contention alone, in our opinion. it would not be open for the a