Unexplained delay in considering a detenu's representation for revocation of a detention order invalidates the continued detention.

( 1 ) BY this writ petition Bhupinder Singh challenges the validity of the detention order pased against him under Section 3 (1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exhcange and Prevention of Smugling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as COFEPOSA Act ). The said order was passed on 14th October, 1988 by Shri K. L. Verma,. Joint Secretary to the Government of India, specially empowered under the COFEPOSA Act, with. a view to preventing the petitioner from engaging in transporting, keeping and dealing in smuggled goods, otherwise than by engaging in concealing smuggled goods. The grounds of detention also dated the 14th October, 1988 were served on the petitioner on 15th October, 1988, the date on which he was detained.

( 2 ) A number of grounds have been taken in the petition to challenge the legality and validity of the impugned order. Mr. R. M. Bagai, learned counsel for the petitioner during arguments has confined himself to only one ground. It is urged that the representation made by the detenu on 1st November, 1988 to the detaining authority seeking revocation of the impugned order, was decided belatedly on 13th December, 1988 without any satisfactory or cogent explanation. Therefore, the continued detention of the detenu is vitiated.

( 3 ) IN paragraph 10 of the petition, the above grievance has been spelled out. That paragraph reads:

"10. That the petitioner made a representation against his detention to the detaining authority on 1st November, 1988 through the Superintendent, Central Jail, wherein he requested the detaining authority to supply him with some documents required by him for making an effective representation against his detention or, in the alternative, to revoke his detention. It is submitted that neither the said representation despite passage of such a long time has been considered nor the petitioner has been supplied with any of the documents required by him for making an effective representation against his detention order. "

( 4 ) IN reply to the above averment, the respondents in their counter-affidavit allege:

"11. With reference to para No. 10, it is denied that the representation was not considered for long time. In any case it is submitted that the date of the representation is 3rd November, 1988 and not 1st November, 1988. It is denied that the petitioner was not supplied the required documents for making an effective representation. On the contrary all the relevant documents were supplied to the petitioner. The petitioner s representation was duly considered and rejected by the competent authority. "

( 5 ) WE may note that the present petition was listed for preliminary hearing on 25th November, 1988, on which date notice to the respondents to show cause against it was issued. The respondents filed their answer on 3rd January, 1989. The petition was admitted on 13th January, 1989. In their counter- affidavit, the date on which the said representation was rejected has not been given but in the further affidavit filed by them, it is stated that the specially empowered officer rejected the same on 13th December, 1988. The time taken to dispose of the representation from 3rd November, 1988 is explained as follows : "the said representation dt. 3-11-88 was received in the COFEPOSA Unit on 4-11-88. As some of the points raised in the representation required comments from the sponsoring authority, the representation was sent to the sponsoring authority, i. e. , Collector of Customs for their comments on 7-11-88, 5th and 6th November, 1988 being holidays as Saturday and Sunday. Their comments were received vide their letter dated 9-12-88 in this Ministry on 12-12-88. 10th and 11th December, 1988 being holidays as Saturday and Sunday. A note raised by the petitioner in his representation and a reply thereto was put up by the concerned officer on 13-12-88 to the detaining authority. The representation was considered by the detaining authority and rejected on 13-12-88 and memo of reject