- (1.) VISHNU Sahai, J. Heard Mr. Virendra Bhatia with Mr. Vivek Shrotria for the petitioner-detenu, Mr. S. K. Singh for respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. B. B. Saxena for Union of India, respondent No. 3.
(2.) THROUGH this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner- detenu has impugned order dated 30-12-2001 passed by the first respondent Mr. C. N. Dubey, the District Magistrate, Gonda detaining him under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act. The detention order alongwith grounds of detention, which are also dated 30-12-2001, was served on the petitioner-detenu on 30- 12-2001 itself and their true copies have been annexed as Annexures 1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition. The prejudicial activities of the petitioner-detenu impelling the first respondent to pass the impugned order of detention are contained in the grounds of detention (Annexure-2 ). Since in our judgment, a reference to them is not necessary for the adjudication of the pleading contained in para 20 of the writ petition and ground (f) of the petition, we are not adverting to them.
(3.) IN para 20 of the petition and ground (f) of the petition, the pleading in substance is that the petitioner made a representation to the State Government and the Union of INdia on 14-1-2002 and there has been delay in disposal of the said representation. Mr. Virendra Bhatia, learned Counsel for the petitioner-detenu emphatically urged that the delay of five days at the level of the State Government in disposing of the representation of the petitioner- detenu has rendered his continued detention illegal and bad in law.;