- (1.) The instant appeal has been filed by the Joint Secretary (Copeposa) to the Government of India, the authority that had passed the order of detention, aggrieved against the order of learned Single Judge dated 21st May, 1999 in W.P. No. 784 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the order of detention impugned in the said writ application was stayed till the hearing of the writ petition.
(2.) On behalf of the respondent/writ petitioner a legal point was sought to be raised as to the maintainability of the appeal filed by the Officer concerned and not by the Union of India which has been added as respondent. We find no force in the said objection as to the maintainability of the instant appeal by the appellant. The order of detention impugned in the writ petition is one passed by the said statutory authority, if he is aggrieved by the order of stay of operation of the said order of detention, in our view, such authority cannot be denied the right to file an appeal. The fact that the Union of India has not joined as appellant would not affect the right of the statutory authority in seeking redressal against the order by which it is aggrieved. The Union of India has been made party respondent and in our opinion, rightly so when it did not join as appellant. On behalf of the Union of India, representation has been made to the effect that it is supporting the stand of appellant herein.
(3.) Since the order under appeal is an interlocutory order, we after having heard the Learned Counsel at length, are of the view that the decision in the appeal should be confined only to the limited extent as to considering whether the Learned Single Judge was right in ordering stay of the operation of the impugned order of detention pending disposal of the writ petition. This is for the reason that the writ petition has been filed questioning the order of detention even before effect was given to the said order of detention i.e. at the pre-execution stage. The Learned Single Judge has, in the judgment under appeal, noted the contentions advanced on behalf of the respondent-writ petitioner assailing the order of detention and also the various judgments relied upon by his Learned Counsel, Mr. Ajit Panja. Learned Judge has likewise, also recorded the submissions of the Learned Additional Solicitor General and opined that the broader issues will have to be considered on affidavits at the time of final hearing of the writ petition. The Learned Single Judge was of the view that "the question of passing any interim order will largely depend on the question of bail having been granted to the petitioner by this Court in respect of same grounds on which the impugned order of detention has been passed.";