Kerala High Court
Vinod Vallikappan vs The District Magistrate on 15 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.1636 OF 2016(D)
PETITIONER:
VINOD VALLIKAPPAN
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O.RAJU.D.VALLIKAPPAN, HAVING HIS PERMANENT ADDRESS
AT VALLIKAPPIL HOUSE, KALKUNDU POST, KARUVARAKUNDU,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SHAJ
SRI.SAJJU.S
RESPONDENT:
THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MALAPPURAM
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
MALAPPURAM - 676 505
R1 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.TEK CHAND
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.1636 OF 2016(D) 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of March 2021
S. Manikumar, CJ
Prayers sought for in the writ petition are as follows:
a. To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, setting aside
Exhibit P2 order.
b. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other order or direction to the
respondent to immediately renew Exhibit P1 gun licence standing to
the name of the petitioner after setting aside Exhibit P2 order.
c. To issue such other directions or orders as this Honourable court may
deem fit in the circumstances of the case.
2. On this day, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.K.Shaj, learned
counsel representing the counsel on record, submitted that the Memo dated
10th December, 2019 was mistakenly filed not pressing the writ petition, on
the premise that, the writ petition has become infructuous. Therefore, seeks
permission to withdraw the Memo dated 10 th December, 2019. However,
submitted that the writ petition may be dismissed granting liberty to the
petitioner to approach before the appellate authority under the Arms Act,
1959.
3. Submission of the learned counsel representing the petitioner is
placed on record.
4. Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959 reads thus:
18. Appeals.--
(1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the licensing authority refusing to
grant a licence or varying the conditions of a licence or by an order of the
licensing authority or the authority to whom the licensing authority is
subordinate, suspending or revoking a licence may prefer an appeal against
that order to such authority (hereinafter referred to as the appellate
authority) and within such period as may be prescribed: Provided that no
appeal shall lie against any order made by, or under the direction of the
Government.
(2) No appeal shall be admitted if it is preferred after the expiry of the
period prescribed therefor: Provided that an appeal may be admitted after
the expiry of the period prescribed therefor if the appellant satisfies the
appellate authority that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal
within that period.
(3) The period prescribed for an appeal shall be computed in accordance
with the provisions of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 (9 of 1908), with
respect to the computation of periods of limitation thereunder.
(4) Every appeal under this section shall be made by a petition in writing
and shall be accompanied by a brief statement of the reasons for the order
appealed against where such statement has been furnished to the appellant
and by such fee as may be prescribed.
(5) In disposing of an appeal the appellate authority shall follow such
procedure as may be prescribed: Provided that no appeal shall be disposed
of unless the appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity of being
heard.
(6) The order appealed against shall, unless the appellate authority
conditionally or unconditionally directs otherwise, be in force pending the
disposal of the appeal against such order.
(7) Every order of the appellate authority confirming, modifying or reversing
the order appealed against shall be final.
Rule 107 of the Arms Rules, 2016 states thus:
107. Appeal against order of licensing authority or an authority
suspending or revoking a licence under sub-section (6) of section 17
of the Act.─ In any case, in which an authority issues an order ─ (i) refusing
to grant or renew a licence or to give a "no objection certificate" for such
grant or renewal; or (ii) varying any condition of a licence or suspending or
revoking a licence under sub-section (1), or sub-section (3) or sub-section (6)
of section 17, the person aggrieved by such order may, within thirty days
from the date of issue of the order, and subject to the proviso to sub-section
(2) of section 18, prefer an appeal against that order, to the concerned
appellate authority.
5. The provisions stated supra, enables any person aggrieved by an
order of the licensing authority refusing to grant licence, to prefer an appeal
within the period provided therefor. Proviso to section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959
states that, "an appeal may be admitted after the expiry of the period
prescribed therefor if the appellant satisfies the appellate authority that he had
sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within that period."
6. In the light of the said statutory provisions and placing on record the
submission of Mr.K.Shaj, learned counsel representing the petitioner, liberty as
prayed for is granted and Memo dated 10th December, 2019 is permitted to be
withdrawn.
Writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
Sd/-
S.MANIKUMAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
smv JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1636/2016
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.66/NBR
GRANTED IN PROCEEDING K DIS. 34696/200 E-1
DATED 23/12/2000 OF THE RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23/12/2015
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
