(1.) By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Bhuru Totla calls in question the order of detention dated 2/7/2002 (Annexure P/i) passed by District Magistrate, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (for short, the NSA).
(2.) Although no reference is made or objection taken by the petitioner to the proceeding or the orders which followed the passing of the impugned order (Annexure P/i), however, from the documents filed by the respondents, it appears that after passing of the order (Annexure P/i), the matter was reported by the District Magistrate on 6/7/2002, to the State Government which, in turn on 10/7/2002 aaxtIai its appioval, in terms of subsection (4) of Section 3 (vide Annexures R/4 and R/5). A report (Annexure R/9) was also sent to the Government of India on 12/7/2002 and the matter was referred to the Advisory Board on 18/7/2002 (vide Annexure R/6). The Advisory Board recorded its opinion of Approval on 30/7/2002 (Vide Annexure R/7) and final order of confirmation (vide Annexure R/ 8) was passed on 6/8/2002, dir1ing that the petitioner be detained for a period of one year ending on 1st July, 2003.
(3.) The challenge is manifold and it is alleged that the District Magistrate had no authority nor any material before him to pass the impugned order; that the grounds of detention were never communicated to the petitioner more particularly, in his mother tongue Urdu as he did not understand Hindi or English; that there was undue delay in sending report to the State Government; that the representation made by the petitioner (Annexures P/S to P/il) to various authorities to wit The President, The Prime Minister, the Chief Minister and the Secretary Home both of the Union and the State Government were not considered; that he was also not given any opportunity of hearing by the Advisory Board; and, that the detention is violative of the fundamental right of life and liberty of the petitioner guaranteed by Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.