Judgment V. Dhanapalan, J. 1. The petitioner is the wife of detenu. The detenu has been branded as a "Goonda" as contemplated under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and detained under order of the 2nd respondent passed in BDFGISSV No.1166/2013 dated 29.09.2013. 2. The detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases:- Sr.No. Police Station and Crime No. Sections of Law 1. J-7, Velachery Police Station Crime No.289 of 2013 Sections 457 and 380 IPC 2. J-7, Velachery Police Station Crime No.967 of 2013 Sections 457 and 380 IPC 3. J-7, Velachery Police Station Crime No.2012 of 2013 Section 379 IPC 4. J-3, Guindy Police Station, Crime No.1017 of 2013 Sections 341, 294(b), 384 and 506(ii) IPC The ground case alleged against the detenu is one registered on 11.09.2013 by the Inspector of Police, J-7, Velachery Police Station in Crime No.2548 of 2013 for offences under Sections 341, 323, 336, 392 r/w 397 and 506(ii) IPC. Aggrieved by the order of detention, the present petition has been filed. 3. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focused his argument on the ground that there is a delay in disposal of the representation dated 15.10.2013, which is violative of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore, on this sole ground alone, the detention order is liable to be quashed. 4. We have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above submission. 5. On a careful scrutiny of the impugned order, it is seen that the detaining authority has passed the order of detention on 29.09.2013 and on receipt of a copy of detention order, the detenu made a representation dated 15.10.2013 to the authorities concerned, which was received on 18.10.2013, for which the remarks called on 18.10.2013 were received on 20.11.2013. On submission of the file on 21.11.2013, it was dealt with by both the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on the same day and thereafter, the file was submitted to the Minister on 23.11.2013. Finally the representation of the detenu was decided to be rejected vide letter dated 25.11.2013. 6. On submission of the file on 21.11.2013, it was dealt with by both the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on the same day and thereafter, the file was submitted to the Minister on 23.11.2013. Finally the representation of the detenu was decided to be rejected vide letter dated 25.11.2013. 6. In this whole process, there occurred an inordinate delay of 23 days, namely, between 18.10.2013 and 20.11.2013 (excluding 10 holidays falling on 19th, 20th, 26th, 27th of October 2013 and 2nd, 3rd, 9th, 10th, 16th and 17th of November 2013), which would definitely cause great prejudice to the detenu and amount to an infringement of right ensured under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the impugned detention order cannot be sustained and is vitiated. 7. Accordingly, the impugned detention order passed by the 2nd respondent, detaining the detenu Kathavarayan, S/o. Narayanasamy, made in BDFGISSV No.1166/2013 dated 29.09.2013 is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The above named detenu, who is detained at the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his custody is required in connection with any other case. 8. However, this order shall not preclude authorities concerned to effectively contest the matter before the Regular Court, uninfluenced by the above order. It is also made clear that this order shall not confer any right whatsoever to the detenu to claim anything before the Regular Court.