IMPORTANT POINT
Supplementary counter affidavit sought to be filed by Central Government 21/2 months after case was admitted is allowed in interest of justice as it explain the disposal of representation by Central Government in 1l days and also explains why these facts were not mentioned at the time of filing of counter affidavit.

JUDGMENT

V.K. Khanna, J. -In this writ petition the petitioner (in jail) has challenged the order dated 15-12-1983 passed by the District Magistrate, Allahabad under section 3(1) of the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, t 980 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

1. 2. The brief facts for the purposes of deciding the present petition are that on 9-12-1983 the District Supply Officer, Allahabad lodged a first information report against the petitioner for committing an offence for the contravention of the provisions of U.P. Cement Control Order (as amended from time to time). According to the first information report, on receiving information that the petitioner had illegally stored cement and was, selling the same in black-market, the District Supply officer along with other officers of that Department reached at the shop of the petitioner where it was alleged that he had stored cement. The petitioner was said to be present at his shop and is said to have admitted on enquiry that he used to sell cement. At the time of inspection the shop was found locked and the petitioner was asked to open the locks. On his refusal to open the locks, the locks were broken and 684 bags of cement and one open bag of cement containing about 10 kilograms of cement and loose cement about 5 kilograms was found in two tins. It was said in the first information report that the petitioner neither produced any paper in connection with storage of cement nor gave any other information. It was alleged that in front of the shop no notice was exhibited regarding stocking of the cement and in this way the petitioner has illegally stored the cement for the purposes of illegally selling in black market and has thus contravened the provisions of U.P. Cement Control Order, 1973 (as amended from time to time) which is an offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act. A case was registered against the petitioner under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and the petitioner was arrested on the same day i.e. 9-12-1983 and lodged in jail. It appears that the District Supply Officer had taken statement of some persons of the locality on 9-12-1983 Enquiry was again made by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Soraon on the direction of the Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supplies) Allahabad and in the aforesaid enquiry statements of several persons were taken on the basis of which the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Soaron submitted a report on 14-12-1983 that the petitioner was illegally carrying on the business of selling cement. It appears that the District Supply officer on 12-12-1983 had sent a letter to the District Magistrate Allahabad detailing all the facts which in his opinion, required detention of the petitioner. On 15-12-1983 the District Magistrate, Allahabad passed the impugned order of detention against the petitioner under section 3(1) of the Act. As the petitioner was in jail since 9-12-1983 in pursuance of a case registered, against him under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate was served on the petitioner in jail.

.3. The petitioner after the service of the impugned detention order made representation On 2-1-1984, which was addressed to the Food Secretary Uttar Pradesh Shasan, Vidhan Bhawan, the District Magistrate, Allahabad, the Chief Secretary to Government of Uttar

.Pradesh, Lucknow, the Home Minister, Government of India, New Delhi, the Prime Minister of India, New Delhi, the President of India, Rashtrapati Bhawan, New Delhi. The District Magistrate, Allahabad forwarded the copy of the representation to the State Government on 3-1-1984 which reached the state Government on 4-1-1984 and on the same date i.e. 4-1-1984 it was sent to the Registrar of the Advisory Board, who received it on the same day. On 24-1-1984 the representation was forwarded by the State Government to the Central Government. The Central Govern