Unauthorised exercise of Central Government eviction power under Defence of India Rules is void and without jurisdiction.

Rule 155 of the Defence of India Rules required the Central Government to form the requisite opinion, record reasons and make the eviction order, and that power could be exercised only by a duly authorised Minister or officer under the Rules of Business. An eviction order issued by an officer lacking such authority was therefore without jurisdiction, ineffective in law and liable to be quashed. The Supreme Court held the impugned eviction order invalid and void for want of authority, and it found it unnecessary to consider the other issues addressed by the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the eviction order made under Rule 155 of the Defence of India Rules was valid when it was issued by an officer who lacked authority to exercise the powers of the Central Government.

Analysis: Rule 155 empowered only the Central Government to form the requisite opinion, record reasons, and make an order of eviction. The power could be exercised only by a duly authorised Minister or officer under the Rules of Business. Since the officer who issued the impugned order had no such authority, the order did not satisfy the mandatory requirements of the rule and was ineffective in law. In these circumstances, it was unnecessary to examine the other issues dealt with by the High Court.

Conclusion: The eviction order was invalid and void for want of authority, and the challenge succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory power is conferred exclusively on the Central Government and the exercise of that power is conditioned by the Rules of Business, an order made by an unauthorised officer is without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

---