it is stated in this affidavit that the petitioner was ordered to be detained on december 29 1964 by the order in question and was actually detained on december 30 1964.
by order of the governumber sd.
these six grounds practically companyer all the grounds.
from the reports received regarding the activities of the petitioner the home minister stated in the affidavit that he was personally satisfied that it was necessary to detain the petitioner under the rules with a view to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the safety of india and maintenance of public order etc.
original jurisdiction writ petition number 97 of 1965.
the order was in these terms order number 8583/c bhubaneswar the 29th december 1964.
whereas the state government is satisfied that with a view to preventing shri jagannath misra son of biswanath misra vill.
the petitioner was a member of the pro peking faction and was under close and companystant watch.
the principal companytention on behalf of the petitioner in relation to and against the affidavit of the home minister is that it is clear from a perusal of the affidavit that the minister did number apply his mind in the matter of the detention of the petitioner.
32 of the companystitution was heard by us on december 7 1965.
k. garg for the petitioner.
the affidavit goes on to say that the decision to detain the petitioner was made on the personal satisfaction of the minister and that the satisfaction was based on several reports placed before the minister with respect to the activities of the petitioner.
petition under art.
s. bindra and r. n. sachthey for the respondent.
the affidavit then goes on to say that after the outbreak of hostilities between china and india and the declaration of emergency by the president a close watch was set on the movements and activities of persons who either individually or as a part of an organisation were acting or were likely to act in a manner prejudicial to the safety of india and maintenance of public order and in this companynection particular attention was paid to the activities of the members of that section of the companymunist party which came to be knumbern as the pro peking faction of the party.
it is unnecessary to refer to all the grounds raised by the petitioner.
secretary to government.
the petitioner was detained by an order issued under r. 30 1 b of the defence of india rules hereinafter referred to as the rules by the government of orissa on december 29 1964.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by wanchoo j. this petition for a writ of habeas companypus under art.
