https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287541 The proviso to Section 1(3) of the Bihar Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947, was treated as an impermissible delegation because it allowed extension of a temporary statute with modifications, including control over whether the Act would continue and in what form; it was therefore ultra vires. A notification under Section 92(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, was held necessary to bring the extended Act into force in the partially excluded area, and the section did not authorise retrospective operation after the Act had lapsed there, so the detention was unauthorised. Bihar Act V of 1949 was held not to revive or validate the expired Act in the absence of clear words, and the detention orders were not saved. en-us Sat, 28 May 1949 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Apr 2020 09:49:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287541 The proviso to Section 1(3) of the Bihar Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947, was treated as an impermissible delegation because it allowed extension of a temporary statute with modifications, including control over whether the Act would continue and in what form; it was therefore ultra vires. A notification under Section 92(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, was held necessary to bring the extended Act into force in the partially excluded area, and the section did not authorise retrospective operation after the Act had lapsed there, so the detention was unauthorised. Bihar Act V of 1949 was held not to revive or validate the expired Act in the absence of clear words, and the detention orders were not saved. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 28 May 1949 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287541