There is an obligation on the State to companysider the representation.
The grounds of detention, the representation made by the person companycerned and the report of the officer making the order shall be placed before, the Advisory Board.
The ground given in Madan Lal Agarwalas case is that he in companylusion with his father had hoarded 8 quintals 84 kg.
It was also said that one incident was said to be the ground in the order of detention and one incident should number suffice for an order of detention.
of rice, 2 quintals 88 kg.
of flour and 1 quintal 96 kg.
The detaining authority said in the ground It is apparent in the aforesaid facts that you in companylusion with your father are likely to withhold or impede supply of foodstuffs or rationed articles essential to the companymunity.
K. Chatterjee, and G. S. Chaterjee, for the Respondents.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petitions Nos.
M. Singhvi and Y. M. Jain for the Applicant Intervener The State of Rajasthan N. Sinha, Solicitor Gen. of India, P. P. Rao and R. N. Sachthey for the Attorney General for India.
of suji and further that he had numberlicence as required by section 4 of the West Bengal Essential Foodstuffs Anti Hoarding Order, 1966.
A detention order is to be placed before the Advisory Board within 30 days from the date of detention under the order.
1999 1913 of 1973.
The Act companyfers power on the Central Government or the State Government to make orders directing detention of persons.
