https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175333 Article 359 did not bar judicial review limited to whether detention was in fact under the Defence of India Act or Rules, whether the detaining authority was competent, or whether the order exceeded delegated power; the petition was therefore maintainable on that limited basis. A detention order framed on the wider ground of preventing acts prejudicial to "public safety and the maintenance of law and order" was not within Rule 30(1)(b), which authorised detention only for prejudicial conduct affecting "public order". Because preventive detention must stay strictly within the language of the empowering rule, an order disclosing a broader and unauthorised ground on its face was invalid, and the detenu was entitled to release. en-us Tue, 07 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:11:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175333 Article 359 did not bar judicial review limited to whether detention was in fact under the Defence of India Act or Rules, whether the detaining authority was competent, or whether the order exceeded delegated power; the petition was therefore maintainable on that limited basis. A detention order framed on the wider ground of preventing acts prejudicial to "public safety and the maintenance of law and order" was not within Rule 30(1)(b), which authorised detention only for prejudicial conduct affecting "public order". Because preventive detention must stay strictly within the language of the empowering rule, an order disclosing a broader and unauthorised ground on its face was invalid, and the detenu was entitled to release. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 07 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175333