( 1 ) ). RULE Mr. K. T. Dave, learned A. P. P. , waives service of rule.

( 2 ) ). The petitioner was externed from the districts of Banaskantha, Mehsana, sabarkantha and Kachchh for a period of two years by virtue of order passed on 11th December, 1998 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Palanpur, in exercise of powers under Secs. 56 (b) of the Bombay Police Act ("the Act" for short ). It was found that the petitioner-externee committed breach of that order and entered Banaskantha district. Therefore, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Palanpur passed order on January 24, 2000 against the petitioner-externee in exercise of Sec. 62 (2) of the Act and directed that the petitioner be arrested and kept in police custody at Porbandar Jail. It is this order, that has given cause for the present petition which is filed by the petitioner through Jail.

( 3 ) ). The petition is based mainly on the ground that the order is ex-fade illegal, passed without jurisdiction and outcome of misreading of the provisions of the Jaw.

( 4 ) ). Attention of this Court is drawn to Sec. 62 of the Act and it is stated that the power with which the authority is invested is only of causing the breaching externee arrested and removed in police custody to a place outside the area as the authority may prescribe. In the instant case, the authority has caused the petitioner arrested and has placed him in Porbandar Jail for a period of two years from 26th January, 2000 and therefore, the order is without jurisdiction and in gross misreading of the provisions of law.

( 5 ) ). Mr. K. T. Dave, learned A. P. P. , has appeared for the respondents.

( 6 ) ). Considering the contentions raised before this Court, it is very clear that the externing authority is empowered to take action under Sec. 62 (2) of the Bombay Police Act against an externee on breach of externment by the externee. This provision runs as under :"62. Procedure on failure of person to leave the area and his entry therein after removal :- (1) If a person to whom a direction has been issued under Secs. 55, 56 or 57 to remove himself from an area - (i) fails to remove himself as directed, or (ii) having so removed himself, except with the permission in writing of the authority making the order as provided in sub-sec. (2), enters the area within the period specified in the order, the authority concerned may cause him to be arrested and removed in police custody to such place outside the area as the said authority may in each case prescribe. (2) The authority making an order under Secs. 55, 56 or 57 may in writing permit any person in respect of whom such order has been made to enter to return to the area, including any contiguous districts or part thereof, from which he was directed to remove himself, for such temporary period and subject to such conditions as may be specified in such permission and may require him to enter into a bound with or without surety for the due observance of the conditions imposed. The authority aforesaid may at any time revoke at any time such permission. Any person who with such permission enters or returns to such area shall observe the conditions imposed, and at the expiry of the temporary period for which he was permitted to enter or return, or on the earlier revocation of such permission, shall remove himself outside such area, or the area and any contiguous districts or part thereof, and shall not enter therein or return thereto within the unexpired residue of the period specified in the original order made under secs. 55, 56 or 57 without a fresh permission. If such person fails to observe any of the conditions imposed, or to remove himself accordingly, or having so removed himself enters or returns to the area, or the area and any contiguous district or part thereof, without fresh permission, the authority concerned may cause him to be arrested and removed in police custody to such place outside the area as that authority may in each case prescribe. "the authority