MOHAMED IZAZ @ IZZU MAMA Vs. R.D.TYAGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitu-tion of India, the petitioner has impugned the detention order dated 30-1-1996 passed by the Respondent no.1 by virtue of the powers vested in him by sub-section (2) of section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 detaining him under the said Act.

(2.) IN our opinion, for the disposal of this petition, a reference to the prejudicial activities of the petitioner contained in the grounds of detention dated 30-1-1996, which were served along with the detention order on the petitioner on 7-2-1996, is not necessary, for this petition, can succeed on a short ground namely the inordinate delay on the part of the Central Government in disposing of the representation sent by the petitioner, under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, to it.

(3.) MR .Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged that on 20-4-1996 the petitioner made a representation to the Central Government and till date, he has received no communication from the Central Government about the fate of his representation. The said ground has been pleaded as Ground no.(E) in para 7 of his petition. The said ground has been replied in paras 6,7 and 9 of the return filed by Mr.Ishwar Singh, Desk Officer of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. In para 6 of the return, it is stated that the representation dated 20th/22nd April, 1996 on behalf of the detenu (petitioner) was received by the Central Government in the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi on 25-4-1996. The said representation was immediately processed for consideration and it was found that certain information from the State Government/Commissioner of Police, Mumbai was required. Conse-quently, a crash wireless message was sent on 26-4-1996. In para 7, the deponent states that on 8-5-1996, the required information was received vide letter of the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai dt. 6-5-1996. He further states that on receiving the said information, case of the detenu was put up before the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs on 9-5-1996, and the latter with his comments, put up the case of the petitioner before the Special Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs, the same day. It has been further stated that the Special Secretary considered the matter and after processing the same, put it before the Home Minister, Government of India on 10-5-1996 and the Home Minister having duly considered the case of the detenu (petitioner) rejected the representation on 26-5-1996. In para 8, reason for the inordinate delay in disposal of the representation culled out is that on 11th, 12th, 18th, 19th, 25th and 26th May, 1996 were holi-days. We regret that the said explanation is an eye-wash. Even if it is to be accepted, then no explanation is forth coming as to why on 13th, 14th, 15th 16th, 17th, 20th, 21th, 22nd, 23rd and 24th May, 1996, representation of the petitioner was not considered by the Home Minister.