Siddh Nath Chaudhari v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 61308 of 2015

Petitioner :- Siddh Nath Chaudhari

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Surendra Nath Tripathi

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Ran Vijai Singh,J.

Heard Sri Surendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anurag Pratap Singh, learned standing counsel for the State- respondents.

Through this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 31.3.2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Rampur (respondent no. 2) in case no. 323/99 (State Vs. Siddh Nath Chaudhari) filed under section 17 of the Arms Act, by which firearm licence of the petitioner has been cancelled. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was never served with the notice by the licencing authority requiring show cause as to why firearm licence of the petitioner be not cancelled. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is provided post decisional hearing in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in

Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India AIR 1978 SC 597, Union of India Vs. Tulsi Ram Patel 1985 (3) SCC 398, I.J. Rao Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. Bibhuti Bagh 1989 (3) SCC 202, Canara Bank Vs. V.K.Awasthi 2005 (6) SCC 321, Muzeeb Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others 1996 (87) RD 66 and Chaturgun Vs. State of U.P. 2005 (2) AWC 1256.

In this regard, the petitioner may file an application, seeking recall of the order dated 31.3.2004 accompanied with his objection to the impugned order, within a period of three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of the order of this Court. In case such an application is filed before the respondent no. 2, the same shall be considered and decided on its own merit in accordance with law, expeditiously by passing a reasoned and speaking order, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of filing of such an application.

It may be clarified that I have not addressed myself on the merit of the

1

case and the respondent no. 2 is free to pass an independent order in accordance with law on its own merit.

With the aforesaid observation / direction, this writ petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 3.11.2015 Amit Mishra

2