ANAND KUMAR DUBEY Vs. D M SULTANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the detention order dated 29-9-2000 passed by the District Magistrate, Sultanpur, detaining the petitioner under Section 3 (1) of National Security Act, 1980. According to admitted case of the parties, the representation to the petitioner to the State Government was received in the Office of District Magistrate on 10-10-2000 which was sent by a Special Messenger, by a covering let ter dated 12-10-2000 to the State Govern ment. The representation of the petitioner was already sent to the Central Govern ment on 12-10-2000. The State Govern ment sent the copies of the representation to the U. P. Advisory Board by its letter dated 21-10-2000 and asked comments from the District Magistrate, Sultanpur. The comments to the detaining authority on the aforesaid representation was not received till 31-10-2000, thus, the State Government once again asked District Magistrate, Sultanpur for comments on 1-11-2000. The comments were not received till 2-11-2000, thus, the State Government examined the repre sentation of the petitioner independently and submitted a detailed note on 3-11-2000. The Special Secretary examined it on 3-11-2000 and thereafter submitted it to the Secretary (Home) and Confidential Department, who examined it on 4-11-2000 and submitted to the higher authorities for final orders of the State Government. After due consideration, the said representation was finally rejected by the State Government on 4-11 -2000.

(2.) FROM the aforesaid facts, it is evi dent that the representation of the petitioner was received in the office on 10-10-2000, but was ultimately rejected on 4-11-2000, after a lapse of more than three weeks. The delay in sending the repre sentation by the detaining authority to the State Government as well as the Central Government has not been explained properly. If the comments from the Dis trict Magistrate were necessary, then it was incumbent upon the District Magistrate to have sent the comments immediately, but as the comments were not received till 2nd November, 2000, the State Government rejected the representation on 4-11 -2000.