The deportation order supersedes any detention order, and the detained person should be given the opportunity to comply with the deportation order before further action is taken.

( 1 ) THIS is an appln. from a person who describes himself as a White Russian and is now confined at the Alipore Jail. He asks us to hold that his confinement is unlawful and that he is entitled to be released There is no formal petn. but the matter came to the notice of the Ct. as a result of a letter sent by the detained person to myself as Chief Justice of this Ct.

( 2 ) IN that letter the detained person states that he is a native of Georgia in Russia; but not a citizen of the U. S. S. E. He says that he is stateless and is what is commonly described as a White Russian.

( 3 ) THIS detained person states that he arrived in India in the month of March 1942, as a volunteer of the British Army and has been in India ever since. Whether this statement is true or false we have no means of testing.

( 4 ) ON 22-7-1947, he states that he was arrested at his residence in Kalimpong and was taken to Kalimpong jail This detention he says was made under para 7, of the Foreigners Order of 1939. On 24-7-1947, he was transferred to Calcutta and was handed over to the Security Control Police. He says that he was kept for a month and a half in the lockup of the Security Control Police and was later transferred to the Presidency Jail under the orders of a D. C. named Gardner also made under para 7 of the Foreigners Order 1939.

( 5 ) ON 15-10-1947, the detained man says that he was served with an order directing him to leave the country within a period of one month from the date of the service of the order the order having been made under Section 3, Foreigners Act, 1946. The detained man was not released, but on the contrary was sent back to the Presidency Jail and later transferred to the Alipore Central Jail. He says that he has requested the authorities on a number of occasions to release him, so that he can comply with the order deporting him from this country, but he says that he has been detained throughout and has been unable to make any attempt to leave the country. It is clear also that up to now the Govt. have not succeeded in making arrangements for this man to leave the country.

( 6 ) THE learned Advocate-General who has appeared on behalf of the Provincial Govt. has contended that the detention of this man is lawful as it was authorised by an order made under the Foreigners Act, 1939. Counsel on behalf of the detained person, however, has pointed out that the Foreigners Order of 1939 has been superseded by a Foreigners Order of 1948 and no order of detention under this latter order has ever been made. In our view, however, it is not necessary to consider what powers the Govt. had under the Foreigners Order 1939, and whether an order of detention under that Order could be still effective, because it appears to us that any order for detention made under the Foreigners Order 1939, has been superseded.

( 7 ) THE order made under para 7 of the Foreigners Order 1939, stated to be dated 28-8-1947. Whether this is a good order under para 7 of the Foreigners Order 1939, it is unnecessary to decide. But assuming that it was a good order, it has in in my view been superseded, because on 22-8-1947, the Central Govt. acting under Sub-section (2) of Section 3, Foreigners Act, 1946, made a deportation order against the detained person. By that order he was directed not to remain in India after the expiry of one month from the date on which the order was served on him and it would appear that the order was actually served on him on 15-10-1947. Further, he was directed to depart from India by such route as might be prescribed for him by the Central Govt. and he was directed that he was not to re-enter India thereafter.

( 8 ) THIS order must be held to supersede any detention order, because in the first place this is an order of the Central Govt. whereas the detention order was an order of the Provincial Govt. and secondly, this order could not possibly be carried out if the detention order remained effective. The order under