Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.N. BHAGWATI, V.D. TULZAPURKAR, E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.
OM PRAKASH BAHL - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
W.P. No. 845 of 1979
Decided on : 15-10-1979
Administrator Reject Representation - It challenges an order of detention made by Administrator under Conservation order of detention was served on detenu and grounds of detention were also served along with order of detention - Detenu made a representation against order of detention and representation was received by Administrator - Since Advisory Board was meeting on Administrator forwarded representation of detenu to Advisory Board on same day on which it was received by him – Held, It is now well settled as a result of decision of this Court that representation made by detenu must be considered by detaining authority before confirming order of detention and consideration by Advisory Board is no substitute for this mandatory requirement - Nor can subsequent consideration and rejection of representation by detaining authority cure invalidity of order of confirmation detention of detenu in present case must therefore be held to be illegal and void - Petition allow.
JUDGMENT :
P.N. BHAGWATI, J.
1. This Writ Petition can be disposed of on a very short ground. It challenges an order of detention made by the Administrator, Delhi Administration on May 21, 1979, under Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The order 4 of detention was served on the detenu on May 24, 1979, and the grounds of detention were also served along with the order of detention. The detenu made a representation against the order of detention on July 2, 1979 and the representation was received by the Administrator on July 7, 1979. Since the Advisory Board was meeting on July 9, 1979, the Administrator forwarded the representation of the detenu to the Advisory Board on the same day on which 4 it was received by him. The Advisory Board at its meeting on July 9, 1979, considered the case of the detenu and reached the opinion that the detention of the detenu was justified. The report of the Advisory Board was forwarded on July 11, 1979, and the Administrator thereafter confirmed the order of detention on July 17, 1979. It appears that the representation of the detenu was not considered by the Administrator before confirming the order of detention and it was only on August 2, 1979 that an order was made by the Administrator rejecting the representation. It is now well settled as a result of the decision of this Court in Vimal Chand Jawantraj Jain v. Pradhan & Ors., AIR 1979 SC 1501, that the representation made by the detenu must be considered by the detaining authority before confirming the order of detention and consideration by the Advisory Board is no substitute for this mandatory requirement. Nor can the subsequent consideration and rejection of the representation by the detaining authority cure the invalidity of order of confirmation. The detention of the detenu in the present case must, therefore, be held to be illegal and void.
2. We accordingly allow the Writ Petition, quash the order of detention of the detenu and direct that he be set at liberty forthwith.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
