https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180857 A preventive detention order under the Tamil Nadu Act was upheld because the materials, including the Forest Officer's report, did indicate ecological destruction amounting to prejudice to public order, and the High Court's contrary factual premise was unsustainable. The Court also applied Section 5A's separability principle, holding that even if one ground was extraneous or irrelevant, the detention remained valid where the remaining grounds were independently sufficient. The earlier precedent relied on was treated as applicable on the same facts and legal setting, so the challenge failed and the detention order was restored. en-us Mon, 11 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Jun 2024 12:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180857 A preventive detention order under the Tamil Nadu Act was upheld because the materials, including the Forest Officer's report, did indicate ecological destruction amounting to prejudice to public order, and the High Court's contrary factual premise was unsustainable. The Court also applied Section 5A's separability principle, holding that even if one ground was extraneous or irrelevant, the detention remained valid where the remaining grounds were independently sufficient. The earlier precedent relied on was treated as applicable on the same facts and legal setting, so the challenge failed and the detention order was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180857