IMPORTANT POINT
The detention orders are liable to be set aside as there is violation of petitioner s right of representation against these orders of detention which were not dealt with expeditiously and were not disposed of by the State Govt. at the earliest.

Headnote:Constitution of India-Art. 32-Writs in the nature of habeas corpus-Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980-Section 3(2)-Detention orders under illegal transportation of kerosene and irregularities in sale of wheat in a fair price shop-Representations made by the petitioners against the order of detention- Whether dealt with expeditiously and disposed of by the State of Govt. at the earliest ? (No)-Writs allowed as right to make representation against the order of detention, which is not only a constitutional right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution but also a statutory right under Section 8(1) of the Act, prejudiced by late disposal due to lethargy on the part of State Govt. (Paras 23 and 24)-Result-Detention orders quashed.

JUDGMENT

S. Saghir Ahmad, J.-These two petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for writs in the nature of habeas corpus were allowed by us by a short order on 21st November, 1995. We now proceed to give our reasons.

2. Kundanbhai Dulabhai Shaik, petitioner in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 491 of 1995 and Rameshchandra Somchand Shah, petitioner in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 492 of 1995, were detained in jail in pursuance of the orders dated 16th August, 1995, passed by the District Magistrate, Ahmedabad and District Magistrate, Surat, respectively, under Section 3(2) of the Prevention of Black Marketing & Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (For short, Act ). These orders are contained in Annexure A to the writ petition in both the cases. The grounds of detention were supplied separately, though on the same date, and they are contained in Annexure B .

3. Petitioner in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 491/95 is the owner of a godown where 4 barrels containing 800 litres of kerosene meant for distribution to the public under the Public Distribution Scheme were found loaded on an auto-rickshaw. On enquiry made by the staff of the Supply Department, it was revealed that those barrels were brought from Shreeji Petroleum Agency, Sarkhej, at the instance of Shri Ishamilbhai who was in possession of the godown and that petitioner was the owner of the auto-rickshaw. Ishamilbhai, on being questioned, gave out that kerosene in 4 barrels was loaded at his instance and that he was the tenant of the godown. The grounds contain various other details, which need not be mentioned here as those details are not relevant to the question on which we intend to dispose of this petition.

4. Petitioner in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 492/95 carries on business in government foodgrains in a fair price shop. He was to sell the wheat at the concessional rate of Rs. 2 per Kg, but when his shop as also the registers and documents contained therein were inspected by the staff of the Supply Department, it was found that he had committed serious irregularities in the sale of wheat. Consequently, he was detained under section 3(2) of the Act in order to prevent him from carrying on his activities prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of essential commodities.

5. In both these petitions, the principal contention raised by the counsel for the petitioners is that the representation made by the petitioners against the order of detention were not dealt with expeditiously and were not disposed of by the State Government at the earliest.

6. The opposite parties have filed counter-affidavits in which they have denied the allegations made by the petitioners have set out in detail as to how their representations were dealt with. The reply filed by the State Government in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 491/95, so far as it relates to the disposal of representation, is, as under :

3. In fact, the above said representation dated 23.8.1995 made by the wife of the detenue Smt. Madinabibi Shaikh was addressed to Chief Minister, Gujarat State, which was received by Chief Minister s office on 25.8.1995, and was sent to the office of Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies Department which was received by the office of the Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies Department on 29.8.1995. The said representation thereafter was sent to the Special Branch of Food and Civil Supplies Department. It was received by the concerned Branch, i.e. Special Branch on 1.9.1995. The Special Branch put up a note on the said representation on 6.9.1995, as there were around 40 to 50 representations which were pending for disposal during the said period. They were taken up chronologically. Therefore, the said representation came to be put up for disposal on 6.9.1995 as 5.9.1995 was holiday being Sunday. The file was cleared by Section Officer on 7.9.1995 and submitted by the Branch on 7.9.1995 to the Department which was cleared by Department on 7.9.1995 and was put up before the Dep

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1996 Supreme(SC) 358

IMPORTANT POINTThe detention orders are liable to be set aside as there is violation of petitioner s right of representation against these orders of detention which were not dealt with expeditiously and were not disposed of by the State Govt. at the earliest.

Cases Referred (20)

IMPORTANT POINT
The detention orders are liable to be set aside as there is violation of petitioner s right of representation against these orders of detention which were not dealt with expeditiously and were not disposed of by the State Govt. at the earliest.