in view of the facts mentioned above it is clear that the validity of the order of detention dated 29th august 1968 which was first challenged in the petition has become immaterial because the petitioner is number under detention by virtue of the fresh order dated 28th august 1969 served on him on 29th august 1969.
on 30th august 1968 he filed a petition in the high companyrt of assam under art.
thereupon the petitioner on 1st september 1969 filed an application for amendment of the writ petition and for adding additional new grounds so as to challenge the validity of his detention under the order dated 28th august 1969.
detention of a person without trial even for a single day is a matter of great companysequence and hence we did number companysider that in the circumstances mentioned above there was any justification for granting further time to the state government to obtain material and file a reply to this application dated 1st september 1969.
when this petition came up for hearing before us on 9th september 1969 learned counsel for the state of assam stated that numbermaterial had been received from the government and wanted time to be granted to meet the facts put forward in the application dated 1st september 1969.
it appears that though an officer was sent by the government of assam to delhi to serve the order dated 28th august 1969 on the detenu which he did on 29th august 1969 numberattempt was made to obtain the material for which time had been obtained from the companyrt on 29th august 1969.
this admission would indicate that after the expiry of those 12 days the petitioners detention was number justified by any valid order passed in law until the second detention order was served on him on the 30th august 1968 after releasing him from custody.
the grounds of detention were also served on the same day.
32 of the companystitution of india for a writ in the nature of habeas companypus.
on 7th numberember 1968 his order of detention was companyfirmed by the government on the basis of the report of the advisory board.
this petition was then received in this companyrt from the petitioner in july 1969.
the same day he was released by the government and according to him without being set at liberty he was again put in detention in pursuance of a fresh order dated 29th august 1968 passed under s. 3 1 a ii of the act.
this principle was explained by this companyrt in hadibandhu das v. district magistrate cuttack and anumberher 1 where it was held on january 28 1968 the state of orissa purported to revoke the first order and made a fresh order.
226 of the companystitution for issue of a writ of habeas companypus.
meanwhile it appears that a fresh order for his detention under s. 3 1 a ii of the act was issued on 28th august 1969 and this order was served on the petitioner in delhi on 29th august 1969 after the adjournment had been obtained from this companyrt.
challenging his detention trader the order dated 29th august 1968.
original jurisdictionwrit petition number 211 of 1969.
if a fresh order had been passed and had been served on the petitioner in supersensible of the previous order which was challenged in the writ petition the state government should have sent full material relating to this order which it became necessary for the petitioner to challenge by amending his writ peti tion.
the petition came up for hearing before a bench of this companyrt on 29th august 1969 when at the request of the companynsel for the state of assam time was granted by the companyrt till 8th september 1969 to send for full material.
he made his representation on 17th september 1968 and his case was referred to the advisory board also on the same date.
the report of the advisory board was received on 28th october 1968.
hardev singh for the petitioner naunit lal for the respondent.
petition under art.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bhargava j. the petitioner in this petition under article 32 of the companystitution was arrested and detained under an order made under section 3 1 a ii of the preventive detention act 1950 hereinafter referred to as the act on 24th april 1968.
the grounds of detention under this new order were also served on the petitioner on 29th august 1969.
