JUDGMENT A.S. Srivastava, J. - By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Bhism Narain alias Kaushal Kishore Tewari alias Kushal Tewari (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) has challenged the validity of an order dated 14-12-84 passed by the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur under S. 3(2) of the National Security Act. 2. In pursuance of the above order of detention the petitioner was sent to jail on 15-12-1984. 3. One of the grounds raised by the petitioner for challenging the validity of his continued detention is that there has been a violation of S. 10 of the National Security Act inasmuch as the petitioner's representation made against his detention was not placed by the State Government before the Advisory Board within the period stipulated by this Section. 4. After his detention on 15-12-1984 the petitioner made a representation on 2-1-1985. This representation was received by the State Government on 5-1-85 along with the comments of the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur dated 4-1-1985. There it was examined by the various officers of the Secretariat on 8-1-1985 and it was then rejected by the Chief Minister on 10-1-1985. On 14-1-1985 the rejection of this representation was communicated to the petitioner through the Superintendent, District Jail, Gorakhpur. It was on 14-1-1985 when the rejection of the representation of the petitioner was being communicated to the petitioner that the State Government placed it before the Advisory Board. 5. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that since his representation was not placed by the State Government before the Advisory Board within a period of three weeks from the date of his detention. there has been a violation of S. 10 of the Act which has rendered the order of his detention invalid. 6. From the above facts it is clear that the period of three weeks prescribed under S. 10 of the Act from the date of the petitioner's detention expired on 5-1-1985. On 2-1-1985, the petitioner made his representation to the Superintendent, Jail, Gorakhpur which was received by the District Magistrate on 3-1-1985. The District Magistrate made his comments hereon on 4-1-1985. It was then sent to the State Government where it was received on 5-1-1985. During this period the District Magistrate, while retaining the representation for his comments did not place it before the Advisory Board directly by sending its copy there. The District Magistrate made his comments hereon on 4-1-1985. It was then sent to the State Government where it was received on 5-1-1985. During this period the District Magistrate, while retaining the representation for his comments did not place it before the Advisory Board directly by sending its copy there. He took no steps in this direction even when he sent it to the State Government. On receipt of the representation on 5-1-1985, the State Government also did not place it before the Advisory Board which is also located at Lucknow. The representation was actually placed before the Advisory Board on 14-1-1985. It is not the case of the State Government that it could not place the petitioner's representation before the Advisory Board on account of paucity of time. On the other hand, it transpires that the placing of this representation before the Advisory Board had slipped the mind of the District Magistrate as well as the State Government, in other words, the compliance of S. 10 of the National Security Act was not in contemplation of the State Government and the District Magistrate when the representation was received by them respectively. It dawned on the State Government only on 14-1-1985. when it was placed before the State Government otherwise there would have been no difficulty in their way in placing the petitioner's representation before the Advisory Board on or before 5-1-1985. The office of Adviser Board is located at Lucknow itself. Therefore, in this case there has been a violation of the provision of S. 10 of the National Security Act which renders the petitioner's continued detention illegal. 7. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 14-12-1985 of the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur passed against the petitioner under S. 3(2) of the National Security Act is hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be set at liberty forthwith if not required to be detained in connection with any other matter.