Tenancy rights forfeiture under NDPS Act lacked jurisdiction where landlord was not before the authority.

Tenancy rights were treated as a personal right arising from the landlord-tenant relationship, and forfeiture would also affect the landlord's ability to enforce tenancy terms, including eviction where appropriate. Because the landlord was not an affected person under the NDPS Act and was not before the Competent Authority, the Authority had no jurisdiction to direct forfeiture of the appellant's tenancy rights. The forfeiture was therefore held invalid and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Competent Authority could forfeit the appellant's tenancy rights in the premises under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Analysis: The tenancy was treated as a personal right arising from the landlord-tenant relationship. Forfeiture of such rights would affect not only the tenant but also the landlord's right to enforce the tenancy terms, including eviction in appropriate cases. The landlord was not an affected person under the Act and was not before the Authority. On that basis, the Authority was held to have no jurisdiction to direct forfeiture of the tenancy rights.

Conclusion: The forfeiture of the appellant's tenancy rights was invalid and was set aside.

---