Thus, this appeal by special leave.
Thereafter, the appellant filed another writ petition and companytended that the detenu had number been informed of his right to make a representation to the Specified Officer.
The detenu, Jayantibhai Rambhai Patel, was detained on April 1, 1992 under COFEPOSA Act.
That companytention was found acceptable and, therefore, the detention order was quashed.
A Division Bench of the High Court under the impugned order dated March 10, 1993 made in Writ Petition No.15974 of 1992 dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the detenu had known that he had a right to make a representation but he did number exercise that right and that, therefore, the order of detention is number vitiated on the ground of number intimation of the right to make representation to the specified Officer.
Subsequently two other detenues filed writ petition on the ground that companyies of the documents supplied to the detenues were illegible and that they have been deprived of their valuable right to make a representation to the Advisory Board, to the State Government and the Central Government.
Therefore, he has been denied of the companystitutional right under Article 22 5 of the Constitution.
The appellant on behalf of her husband, filed a writ Petition in A.P. High Court.
Leave granted.
The Constitution Bench of this Court in Kamleshkumar Ishwardas Patel vs. Union of India Ors.
The High Court in the first instance dismissed the writ petition.
