NAWAB DULHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the detention order dated 25-4-2000 as contained in Annexures-1 and 2 to the writ petition, said to have been served upon the petitioner on 30-4-2000. The impugned order against him was passed by respondent No. 3, the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. He has also challenged his continued detention under the said order and has prayed to set at liberty forthwith by issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus.

(2.) Originally, the petitioner had impleaded five respondents including Superintendent of Police, Udham Singh Nagar. However, on oral prayer of petitioner, respondent no 4 was permitted to be deleted and respondent No. 5 Jail Superintendent, District Jail Rampur was renumbered as respondent No. 4, Counter-affidavits have been filed by four respondents. The petitioner's counsel expressed his desire not to file any Rejoinder affidavit. We have, therefore, heard Sri D. S. Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and Sri Kamlesh Narain Pandey appearing for respondent No. 1.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner haschallenged the impugned detention order and continued detention of the petitioner thereunder on the grounds- (i) that there was unexplained inordinate delay on the part of the State Government respondent No. 2 in disposal of the petitioner's representation made on 17-5-2000; (ii) the detention order did not apprise the petitioner of the right that the representation by the detenu against the order can also be made before the District Magistrate, the Detaining Authority; and (iii) the representation was not placed before the Advisory Board. Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh has fairly conceded that there was delay in disposal of the representation by the respondent No. 2, which has not been explained in the counter-affidavit.