PAPPU @ VEERENDRA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court to assail the order of District Magistrate dated 3.3.2014, whereby the said Authority has passed an externment order against the petitioner. The petitioner was prohibited to enter the districts of Shivpuri, Gwalior and Bhind. The appellate order dated 8.7.2014 is also called in question.

(2.) SHRI R.S.Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a notice, Annexure P/4, was issued which was never served upon the petitioner. A bare perusal of notice shows that it was issued to exercise power flowing from Section 3(1) of Madhya Pradesh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (hereinafter called as 'Adhiniyam'). The notice was allegedly affixed at the residence of the petitioner. Thereafter, ex parte order dated 3.3.2014 (Annexure P/2) is passed.

(3.) BY taking this Court to Section 3 of the Adhiniyam and the impugned order, it is contended that the authority has issued notice under one provision and passed the order against a different drastic provision, which hits Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. He placed reliance on (Asaf Ali vs. State of MP, 2006 3 MPLJ 592) and (Preetam Sahu vs. State of MP, 2012 2 MPLJ 232). In addition, he submits that before issuance of notice, Annexure P/4, the petitioner was already acquitted from the criminal cases, which became reason for his externment.