1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. In the present case it is an admitted fact that by order dated 1st March, 1999 the appellant was detained under the COFEPOSA Act, 1974. He submitted a representation dated 20th March, 1999 through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Trivandrum. That representation was received by the Detaining Authority on 22nd March, 1999. It is submitted that on 23rd March 1999 the Detaining Authority called for the remarks of the Sponsoring Authority. It is further stated that remarks of the Sponsoring Authority were received by the Detaining Authority on 9th April, 1999. Subsequently, on 23rd April, 1999 Detaining Authority prepared a reply rejecting the representation. That reply was kept by some officers on their file and it was intimated only on 28th April, 1999.

4. It has been repeatedly stated by this Court that representation of the detenu is required to be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible by the Government. In Rajammal v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ann, JT 1998 (8) SC 598 = ((1999) 1 SCC 417) this Court again reiterated the constitutional obligation of the Government to consider the representation f