Basant, J.

1. Does Section 10(2) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the KAAPA') apply, control and guide proceedings under Section 15(2) of the KAAPA? This is the short question of law that arises for consideration in this case.

2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner to assail an order of restraint passed against his brother by the 3rd respondent under Section 15(1) of the KAAPA, which order has been upheld by the Advisory Board constituted under Section 8 of the KAAPA vide Ext.P5 order. It is unnecessary to advert to the relevant facts in any greater detail in the nature of the limited contention that is raised before us. The petitioner's brother one Sushi was proceeded against on the ground that he is a known goonda. Show cause notice dated 16/11/2009 (Ext.P2) was issued. That evoked Ext.P3 reply from the said Sushi. Ext.P4 order of restraint under Section 15 of the KAAPA was passed by the 3rd respondent against the said Sushi on 19/1/2010. That was served on him on 28/1/2010. The order directed the said Sushi not to enter specified areas for a period of four months from the date of service of the said order Ext.P4. An appeal/representation was preferred against the said order under Section 15(2) of the KAAPA before the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board, by Ext.P5 order, dismissed the said appeal/representation on 03/03/2010. The period of restraint under Ext.P4 order has already expired. But the petitioner is still interested in challenging the said order of detention for the reason that prosecution under Section 15(4) of the KAAPA has been initiated against the said Sushi on the ground that on 02/03/2010 he has violated the order. The said Sushi is in custody in connection with that prosecution. The petitioner hence has preferred this writ petition on his behalf to challenge Exts.P4 and P5.

3. We will straight away advert to the fact that Ext.P5 order was passed by the Advisory Board under Section 15(2) of the KAAPA. When the Advisory Board passed that order, even though the Advisory Board consisted of three members, only two of the three were present. It is not now disputed that on the relevant date, there were three members on the Advisory Board and the third member Sri.T.K.Wilson was on leave due to illness.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner raises before us the only contention that the appeal preferred by the appellant has not been properly disposed of by the Advisory Board. Inasmuch as his appeal/representation under Section 15(2) of the KAAPA has not been properly disposed of by the Advisory Board, the order of restraint passed under Section 15(1) of the KAAPA that is, Ext.P4 order, is liable to be set aside. This, in short, is the only contention raised.

5. An Advisory Board is constituted as per the provisions of Section 8 of the KAAPA. We extract the same below:

“8. Constitution of Advisory Boards.- (1) The Government shall constitute one or such number of Advisory Boards as may be necessary for the purposes of this Act, with such territorial of functional jurisdiction, as may be specified.

(2) Every such Board shall consist of a Chairman who is, or had been Judge of a High Court and two other members who are qualified under the Constitution of India to be appointed as a Judge of a High Court.

(3) The salary, allowances, tenure and service conditions of the Chairman and Members of the Advisory Board may be such as may be prescribed.

6. We may, at the outset, note that an Advisory Board is to be constituted not only to answer references under Section 9; but also to discharge the duties/obligations and exercise the powers under Section 15(2) of the KAAPA. We extract Section 15(2) of the KAAPA below:

15. Power to make orders restricting the movements of certain persons.- (2): Any person aggrieved by an order issued under sub-section (1) may represent before the Advisory Board within fifteen days of the date of service of the order and the