SATISH SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VISHNU Sahai, J. Through this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-detenu Satish Singh has impugned the order dated 4-1-2003 passed by the third respondent. Mr. Ram Kumar, District Magistrate, Sultanpur, detaining him under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act. The detention order, alongwith the grounds of detention, which are also dated 4-1-2003, was several on the petitioner-detenu on 4-1-2003 itself, and their true copies have been annexed as Annexures 1 (B) and respectively to the writ petition.

(2.) THE prejudicial activities of the petitioner-detenu impelling the third respondent to issue the impugned detention order against him are contained in the grounds of detention, but since, in our view, a reference to them is not necessary for the adjudication of the pleadings contained in paragraph 10 of the petition and those contained in ground 15 (b) thereof, on which alone this writ petition deserves to succeed, we are not adverting to them. THE substance of the pleadings contained therein is that on 13- 1-2003 the petitioner-detenu made a representation to the State Government/the Union of India/the Advisory Board, but the said authorities have not taken any decision on it. Mr. R. K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner-detenu however only restricted his challenge so far as the representation made by the petitioner-detenu to the Union of India (Respondent No. 1) is concerned.

(3.) IN the instant case, the ratio laid-down in Harish Pahwa's case (supra) has been given a go-bye because as mentioned earlier although the Union Home Secretary rejected the detenu's representation on 24-1-2003 but the rejection was only communicated to him on him 29-1-2003.