Jitesh P vs The District Magistrate
2022 Latest Caselaw 6356 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
            FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                             WP(C) NO. 12575 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

              JITESH P.,
              AGED 47 YEARS
              S/O.RAJENDRAN P., GEETHAM, PUTHILLAM PARAMBA,
              YMCA LANE, KOZHIKODE-673 001.

              BY ADVS.
              SAJI KURIACHAN
              M.R.NANDAKUMAR


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
              CIVIL STATION P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 020.

     2        THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
              KOZHIKODE CITY, KOZHIKODE-673 001.

              BY ADV. SMT. AMMINIKUTTY.K. GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS     WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
03.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 12575 OF 2022
                                    2




                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 03rd day of June, 2022

The petitioner has applied for gun licence and is

aggrieved by the delay in processing his application

and taking a decision thereon. Reference is made to

Rule 14(3) of the Arms Rules, 2016, to contend that

the process should be completed and an order in

writing, either granting or refusing the licence, issued

within 30 days. Learned Counsel for the petitioner

referred to the decision in Chandran Nair vs.

Additional District Magistrate [2015 (1) KHC

351], to contend that an application for gun licence

need not establish that there exists threat to his life

or property.

2. The 1st respondent has filed a statement,

wherein it is pointed out that the petitioner's

application for new arms licence was received at the

office of the 1st respondent on 10.01.2022 and the WP(C) NO. 12575 OF 2022

application is under process. As part of the process,

reports have been called from the District Police Chief

and the Tahsildar. Once the reports are received, an

opportunity of personal hearing will be afforded to the

petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner has to submit an

application in Form S-1 under Rule 10 of the Arms

Rules, in proof of his arms training. According to the

1st respondent, the petitioner has rushed to this Court

at a premature stage, without waiting for completion

of the initial process of receipt of reports and hearing.

Having heard the learned Counsel on either

side, I deem it appropriate to dispose the writ petition

directing the 1st respondent to complete the initial

stage of hearing of the petitioner within two months

of receipt of a copy of this judgment. At the time of

hearing, the 1st respondent shall advert to the

judgments in Chandran Nair vs. Additional

District Magistrate [2015 (1) KHC 351] and

Aboobaker T.V. v. Land Revenue Commissioner

[2022 (2) KHC 170]. Depending on the outcome of WP(C) NO. 12575 OF 2022

the hearing, the petitioner will have to file an

application in Form-S1 and the proceedings will be

continued thereafter.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE NB/3-6 WP(C) NO. 12575 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12575/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 05.01.2022. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.01.2022.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT DATED 19.11.2014 IN WP(C) NO.38165/2010 OF THIS COURT REPORTED IN 2015(10 KHC 351.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT DATED 15.02.2022 IN WP(C) NO.35111/13 AND CONNECTED CASES OF THIS COURT REPORTED IN 2022 (2) KHC 170 (DB). RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE