“25 Thus, we can now reasonably say that although the offcer is having the discretion to extern a person from a much larger area, the discretion is neither unfettered nor uncanalized nor unrestricted. The discretion is rather guided by the sound principles of judicial review of administrative action or statutory discretion which have now been called the Wednesbury principle of unreasonableness. That would mean that an externment order must be based upon some material, that it must refer to some material on record, and if that is done, the requirements of law are met and the judicial review would go no further to examine suffciency or otherwise of such material. In a given case, it may also happen that the externment order does not refer to some material on record. Still, the externment order could be seen as unassailable. Such possibility would arise when the situation of surrounding areas is such as to give rise to an impression upon taking of judicial notice of the situation that these areas are contiguous or adjacent to each other or inter-connected with each other through the improved means of transport and communication warranting externment of a person from a larger area in order to sweep the person off his moorings, just to make the order of externment effective and practicable, as held in Pandharinath (supra). But, some time the facts and circumstances may not be so self-speaking and in such a case, no judicial notice could possibly be taken. It is in such a case, there would be need for the externment order to refer to some material on record, though not eloquently, and if that is done, the externment order would clear the validity test of Wednesbury doctrine. Once such reference to some material on record is seen, the judicial review has to stop as no further
