ANJALAI Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the Mother of the detenue. THE petitioner has come forward with this habeas corpus petition seeking for the relief of quashing the detention order dated 13.4.2010, slapped on her son branding him as "Goonda" as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of dangerous activities of Boot leggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982).

(2.) MR. G.R. Swaminathan, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though there are several grounds raised by the petitioner, he is confined only to the prime ground to the effect of delay in considering the representation of the detenu. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the detenu has sent his representation dated 19.4.2010 and the same was received on 21.4.2010 and remarks were called for on 22,4.2010 and thereafter no reminders were sent and ultimately remarks have been received on 5.5.2010 and as such there is a delay in even calling for the remarks and for receiving the remarks and as such there is a delay of 12 days at the first stage. It is contended that there is also a further delay in considering and disposing of the representation. As the authority concerned after the receipt of the remarks, the under Secretary and the Joint Secretary have dealt with the remarks on 6.5.2010 and the file has been sent to the Hon'ble Minister for Law on 7.5.2010 and the rejection letter was prepared on 13.5.2010 and the rejection letter was sent to the detenu on 14.5.2010 and ultimately the same was served on the detenu on 15.5.2010 and as a result there is a further delay of eight days in considering the representation and there is no explanation for the same and as such the impugned order of detention is vitiated and the same is liable to be quashed.

(3.) WE have given our careful and anxious consideration to the rival submissions put forward by either side and perused the impugned order of detention.