SETH BIKHRAJ JAIPURIA vs UNION OF INDIA

The Supreme Court held that contracts made by the Divisional Superintendent of the East Indian Railway were not binding on the Government as they failed to comply with Section 175(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935, which mandates that contracts must be expressed to be made by the Governor-General and executed on his behalf. The Court emphasized that the authority to execute contracts must be clearly conferred and that the absence of such expression rendered the contracts unauthorized. Consequently, the appellant's claim for damages for breach of contract was denied, affirming the respondent's non-liability.