SHAKILAMARY Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come forward with this petition challenging the order of detention passed by the second respondent-Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai against her son, Edwin @ Edmand, by virtue of powers conferred under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootlegger, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, and Slum Grabbers Act 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982) read with G.O.Ms.No.130 Prohibition and Excise Department dated 18.7.2003 issued under Section 3(2) of the Act treating the detenu as a GOONDA.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondents and perused the records of the case.

(3.) Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has made an attempt in his argument to show that the representations sent on behalf of the detenu were not considered by the detaining authority promptly, the records available disclose that both the representations were dealt with without any undue delay and disposed of by the detaining authority and therefore we are unable to accept the contention of the petitioner's counsel on this aspect of the matter.