https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160452 In judicial review of preventive detention, the Court may examine only whether the order rests on relevant material and was made by a competent authority; it cannot assess the adequacy of the material or substitute its view on subjective satisfaction. The detention order, grounds and direction issued in the name of the Governor and duly authenticated were treated as an order of the State Government, and the challenge for non-application of mind and want of competence failed. The objection that the appeal had become infructuous on expiry of the detention period was rejected. The High Court's quashing of the detention order was held unsustainable and the detention order was restored. en-us Fri, 23 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Aug 2014 17:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160452 In judicial review of preventive detention, the Court may examine only whether the order rests on relevant material and was made by a competent authority; it cannot assess the adequacy of the material or substitute its view on subjective satisfaction. The detention order, grounds and direction issued in the name of the Governor and duly authenticated were treated as an order of the State Government, and the challenge for non-application of mind and want of competence failed. The objection that the appeal had become infructuous on expiry of the detention period was rejected. The High Court's quashing of the detention order was held unsustainable and the detention order was restored. Case-Laws FEMA Fri, 23 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160452