JUDGMENT  

S.C. AGRAWAL, J.- Leave granted in SLP (Crl) No. 282 of 1994.

2. When an order for preventive detention is passed by an officer especially empowered to do so by the Central Government or the State Government, is the said officer required to consider the representation submitted by the detenu?

3. This is the common question that arises for consideration in these appeals in the context of orders for preventive detention passed by officers especially empowered by the Central Government under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short "COFEPOSA Act") and the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (for short PIT NDPS Act). There is divergence in the decisions of this Court on this question. In Amir Shad Khan v. L. Hmingliana {(1991) 4 SCC} (decided by a Bench of three Judges) it has been held that where an officer of the State Government or the Central Government has passed any detention order and on receipt of a representation he is convinced that the detention needs to be revoked he can do so. In State of Maharashtra v. Sushila Mafatlal Shah {(1988) 4 SCC 490 } (decided by a tw