Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022/15TH POUSHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 170 OF 2022 PETITIONER: SURESH, AGED 54, S/O. PARAMESWARAN, THAMARASSERY HOUSE, PUTHENPADAN DESOM, THAIKKATTUSSERY P. O., THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 306. BY ADV N.L.BITTO RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REP.BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033. 3 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 002. SMT.PARVATHY KOTTOL, G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of January, 2022 The petitioner states that he is a retired Military Officer, having a Gun Licence. He is now working as a Security Guard of a financial institution. The petitioner, due to the nature of his job, requires Arms Licence. When the period of the Arms Licence issued to the petitioner expired, the petitioner filed an application for renewal of licence on 03.10.2020. However, the application for renewal of the licence has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner had applied for Gun Licence as part of employment, which is not permissible.
2. The petitioner thereafter filed Ext.P3 appeal invoking Section 19 of the Arms Act, before the Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner states that as per the judgment of this Court
reported in Chandrasekharan Nair v. Additional District Magistrate [2015 (1) KLT 41], once a Gun Licence is issued, the same cannot be revoked except for the reasons stated in Section 14 of the Arms Act. The petitioner was a Military Officer and has several bad experience during his job. Therefore, the renewal of Arms Licence is extremely necessary, contended the petitioner.
3. The learned Government Pleader pointed out that the petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 appeal only on 30.12.2021 and has rushed to this Court without waiting for the outcome of the appeal.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
5. From the pleadings, it is evident that the petitioner was holding a Gun Licence, the renewal of which has been refused by the respondents. The petitioner has
submitted Ext.P3 appeal invoking Section 19 of the Arms Act. Ext.P3 being a statutory appeal, the statutory authority has a duty to consider the appeal in accordance with law within a reasonable period. Therefore the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 appeal filed by the petitioner within a time frame.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of three months. Pending disposal of the appeal, the direction to surrender the gun held by the petitioner should be deferred.
Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd/05.01.2022 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 170/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF GUN LICENSE NO.1650/TSR ISSUED BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR DATED 16.11.2004. Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 26.07.2021. Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF APPEAL PENDING AS A2/222024/2021 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30.12.2021.