Unexplained delay in disposal of representation by the Central Government violates the detenu's right to make a representation against the detention order as soon as possible, as guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

In this Habeas Corpus petition, the petitioner has assailed the detention order dated 5th November, 1998 passed by the District Magistrate, Imphal East District, Manipur detaining the detenu, Mr. Yangminthang Haokip alias Thangboi alias Wilson, son of late Lalkholun Haokip of Nungmanbi village, PS Saikul, Senapati District. By the aforesaid order dated 5.11.98, the detenu was ordered to be detained by the District Magistrate, Imphal East District in exercise of the powers under section 3 (2) and 3 (3) of the National Security Act, 1980 which is under challenge in this petition.

2. In the Habeas Corpus petition though numerous grounds are taken by the petitioner questioning the order of detention, the learned senior counsel, Mr. N. Kerani Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly emphasised on the point of delay in disposing of the representation filed by the detenu before the concerned appropriate authority. The order of detention, as mentioned earlier, was passed on 5.11.98 when the detenu was in prison in connection with FIR No. 322 (8) 98 of the Imphal Police Station under sections 121/121A/400/212 IPC read with section 13 of the UA (P) Act and 25 (IB) of the Arms Act. The grounds of detention was furnished to the detenu on 7.11.98. By the said communication, the detenu was informed about his right to submit representation against the order of detention before the Central Govt and the State Govt. The detention order was approved by the State Govt on 16.11.98. While the detenu was in jail, he submitted representations on 25.11.98 one addressed to the Secretary to the Govt of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Internal Security, and another to the Chief Secretary to the Govt of Manipur. The order of detention was confirmed by the State Govt on 14.12.98. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the representation dated 25.11.98 addressed to the State Govt was disposed by the State Govt on 1.12.98.

An affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent Nos 1 and 2 through the Deputy Secretary to the Govt of Manipur, Department of Home Affairs. From the affidavit, it transpires that the representation dated 25.11.98, was rejected on 2.12.98 and the order was issued on 3.12.98. However, from the records placed before us by the learned Govt Advocate, Manipur, it appears that the representation dated 25.11.98 was in fact disposed on 1.12.98.

We have gone through the records and from the records it transpires that the appropriate authority took the decision to dispose of the representation on 1st of December, 1998 itself. Whether the representation was disposed of on 2.12.98 or on 1.12.98, is not material so far as the State Govt is concerned since we do not find any undue delay on the part of the State Govt in disposal of the representation of the detenu.

3. Mr. N. Kerani Singh, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, however, seriously assailed the sluggishness of the Central Govt in the disposal of the representation of the detenu. The learned senior counsel submitted that the detenu sent representation to the Central Govt. The State Govt in its affidavit has confirmed that the representation submitted by the petitioner to the Central Govt was forwarded to the Central Govt on 27.11.98 by Speed Post. The fact that it took the Central Govt-about twenty nine days, according to the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, itself is violative of Article 22 (5) of the Constitution.

Mr. N. Ibotombi Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Central Govt, on the other hand, denied and disputed and contentions raised by Mr. N. Kerani Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Mr. N. Ibotombi Singh, the learned CGSC referring to the affidavit filed on behalf of the Central Govt by the Under Secretary to the Govt of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, submitted mat the representation dated 25.11.98 preferred by the detenu was received by the Central Govt on 7.12.98 through