H. L. AGRAWAL, C. J.

( 1 ) ALL the three writ applications which are in the nature of Habeas Corpus arise out of the same incident leading to the passing of the impugned orders of detention (Annexure-1 to each of the writ applications) by the District Magistrate, Cuttack, under S. 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short 'the Act' ).

( 2 ) ALL the three petitioners were arrested on 19-3-1987 and a copy of the grounds of detention dt. 22-3-1987 (Annexure-2) was served on each of them on 22-3-1987 itself in the Cuttack Jail.

( 3 ) IT is alleged in the grounds of detention (Annexure-2) that on 22-1-1987 at about 8. 30 A. M. while one Sudhakar Behera was taking tea at the tea-stall of one Madhusudan Behera, the three petitioners along with a few others armed with various deadly weapons like sword, Bhujali, Bombs, etc. appeared there. Petitioner Bichi alias Prakash is said to be holding two bombs in his hand. Petitioner Nali alias Nilambar was holding a sword and a Bhujali and petitioner Ullash a sword. It is said that petitioners Nali and Ullash along with their associate Babuni forcibly dragged Sudhakar up to the pond situated at the backside of the Gumti of Kahnu Charan Das and dealt blows on him with Bhujali and sword. Petitioner Bichi and others were hurling swords and showing bombs and shouting that they would kill any one who would interfere. Sudhakar Behera became senselesson accountof the injuries sustained by him. The culprits thinking him to be dead fled away. When the culprits were fleeing, Bijay Kumar Sethi and others chased them when petitioner Bichi is alleged to have exploded the bombs due to which they had to retreat out of fear. On account of the above anti-social and violent activities of the detenus and their associates, a panic was created in the locality and the shop-keepers closed their shops and the inhabitants shut themselves inside their houses. The vehicular traffic on the road is also said to have stopped and "peace and tranquillity of the area was completely jeopardised" as the detenus and their associates were "openly announcing to murder anybody who intervened" for which a sense of panic prevailed in the area and the even tempo of life of the community and public peace and order was disturbed.

( 4 ) A case under Ss. 147/148/149/341/307, I. P. C. read with S. 9-B of the Indian Explosives Act was also registered on the same day with the Malgodown Police.

( 5 ) THE order of detention (Annexure-1) was approved by the State Government on 28-3-1987 and on 29-3-87 a copy thereof was forwarded to the Central Government. On 3-4-1987, each of the petitioners addressed representations to the Chief Minister of Orissa through the Jailor and also sent a copy there-of to the Central Government through the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi in which they denied their involvement in the occurrence and pleaded, inter alia, that they were falsely implicated in the case.

( 6 ) THE representations of the petitioners were rejected by the State Government on 28-4-1987 and by the Central Government on 4-5-1987, the fact of rejection being communicated to them on 4-5-1987 and 11-5-1987 wide Annexures 5 and 6 respectively.

( 7 ) SHRI Pasayat, learned counsel for the petitioners, challenged the impugned order of detention inter alia on the following grounds :- (i) The grounds of detention were vague and, in any event, were not in existence before the detaining authority while passing the impugned order of detention; and (ii) Great delay was caused in disposing of the representations of the petitioners by the State Government as well as the Central Government.

( 8 ) TWO counter-affidavits have been filed on behalf of opposite party No. 2 denying the allegations and infirmities pointed out by the petitioners in the writ petitions. Besides giving details about the movement of the representations from stage to stage, which I shall presently refer, it has been stated that the total time taken for disposal of the