https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165226 Article 22(5) gives a detenu a substantive right to make a representation against preventive detention to any authority capable of granting immediate relief by revoking the order. In cases under COFEPOSA and the PIT NDPS Act, a specially empowered officer remains the detaining authority because the scheme does not require prior governmental approval and the officer retains revocation power under the General Clauses Act. The detenu may therefore represent directly to that officer, and the officer must consider it independently. Failure to inform the detenu of this right, or failure by the officer to decide the representation, denies the constitutional safeguard and vitiates the detention. en-us Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Jul 2014 13:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165226 Article 22(5) gives a detenu a substantive right to make a representation against preventive detention to any authority capable of granting immediate relief by revoking the order. In cases under COFEPOSA and the PIT NDPS Act, a specially empowered officer remains the detaining authority because the scheme does not require prior governmental approval and the officer retains revocation power under the General Clauses Act. The detenu may therefore represent directly to that officer, and the officer must consider it independently. Failure to inform the detenu of this right, or failure by the officer to decide the representation, denies the constitutional safeguard and vitiates the detention. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165226