The detention is challenged on several grounds.
On the peculiar facts of this case, we are number persuaded to accept this companytention.
The only companytention based on undisputed facts, advanced by Mr Jethmalani on behalf of the detenu, is that he had on January 24, 1980 made a representation to the Central Government Ex.
According to the Counsel for the writ petitioner, it was filed on January 28, 1980.
The representation dated January 24, 1980, is addressed to Central Government through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue and Banking North Block, New Delhi, and 2 Deputy Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Home Department Special , Bombay, January 26, 1980 was a Republic Day and the offices of the State and the Central Government were closed.
This shows that possibly the writ petition and the representation Ex.
One of them was that prior to January 24 1980, the detenu had made two representations to the Government of Maharasthra, both they were number companysidered.
L requesting it to revoke his detention and that this representation remained unattended and has number been companysidered by the Central Government and, therefore, the detention is vitiated.
L dated January 24, 1980 were prepared at the same time.
The factum of making these representations was denied in the companynter affidavit field on behalf of the respondent State.
It came up for hearing on February 1, 1980 and rule was issued.
S. Sarkaria, J. This is a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, on behalf of one Jovito Anthony Fernandis, who has been detained in the Central Prison, Nagpur, in pursuance of an order of his detention passed under Section 3 1 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 here in after referred to as the COFEPOSA .
The detenu is the husband of the writ petitioner.
