Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38997 of 2018 Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Lodhi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kunwar Mayank Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 21.06.2018 passed by the respondent no. 2 in Case No. 19 of 2017 (State of U.P. Vs. Chandra Prakash Lodhi), under Section 14(a) of the Arms Act.
3. The petitioner's application for issuance of fire-arm license under the heirloom category has been rejected by the District Magistrate, Fatehpur in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee headed by the concerned Divisional Commissioner. Since the rejection of the application is based on the prior decision of the Committee, the remedy of appeal is illusory. Hence this writ petition has been entertained.
4. On merits, it is seen that the petitioner had made an application for issuance of the fire-arm license for S.B.B.L. Gun on 29.05.2017. The petitioner made that application for the purpose of possessing the fire-arm that came to him by way of inheritance upon the death of his brother.
5. Perusal of the impugned order dated 21.06.2018 reveals that the petitioner's application had been rejected on the solitary reason given in the order being that the petitioner was already in possession of N.P.B. rifle, which was sufficient for his own security needs.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once it is accepted that the petitioner had applied for the issuance of a fresh fire-arm license under the heirloom category, it was wholly irrelevant whether there existed any other or earlier license issued to the petitioner for his own security needs.
7. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has been unable to show that there exists any other reasoning in the impugned order as may justify the conclusion reached there in.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is seen that the District Magistrate, Fatehpur and the Committee have not applied their minds to the relevant criteria that would govern issuance of the fire-arm license under heirloom category, and have treated the application filed by the petitioner to be one for his personal security.
9. Considering the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition pending or calling for counter affidavit. The order dated 21.06.2018 passed by the respondent no. 2 is hereby set-aside. The matter is remitted to the District Magistrate, Fatehpur (respondent no. 2) to decide a fresh in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
10. With the aforesaid observation, the present petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Prakhar