Judgment :- (Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of habeas corpus as stated therein.) P. Sathasivam, J. The petitioner by name Subbulakshmi, challenges the impugned order of detention dated 18.08.2005, detaining her son Saravanakumar under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (Central Act 65 of 1980). 2. Heard both sides. 3. At the foremost the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was delay in disposal of the representation of the detenu dated 06.09.2005, which vitiates the ultimate order of detention passed by the detaining authority. With reference to the said claim, the second respondent filed a counter affidavit which shows that the representation dated 06.09.2205 from the detenu was received by their Office on 22.09.2005 from the Government vide letter No.10052/L&O-G 2005-1 dated 20.09.2005. It is further stated that on 23.09.2005 it was sent to the Sponsoring Officer, for his remarks. The remarks of the Sponsoring Officer was received on 29.09.2005. On 03.10.2005, the reply for the same has been sent to the Government with comments. On 13.10.2005, the Government has communicated its final decision taken in the matter to the detenu vide letter No.10052/L&O-G/2005-06. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner though a request was made for the remarks from the Sponsoring Officer on 23.09.2005, it is not clear why the Sponsoring Authority had taken time till 29.09.2005 for submitting his report. Even if we exclude the intervening holidays, viz., 24th and 25th of September, 2005, we are of the view that the time taken by the Sponsoring Officer in sending his report is on the higher side. In the absence of proper explanation by the Officer concerned, we hold that the delay has prejudiced the detenu in disposal of his representation. On this ground, the impugned detention order is vitiated and the same is quashed; accordingly, this petition is allowed. The order of detention impugned in the petition is set aside and the detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith from the custody unless he is required in connection with any other case.