1. The petitioner challenges an order issued by the Commissioner of Land Revenue, who has rejected the application of the petitioner for licence to hold a Non-Prohibited Bore weapon on the ground that the petitioner does not face imminent and grave danger to his life. The petitioner has challenged this order, appended to this writ petition as Ext.P8, on various grounds but primarily alleging that it has been issued without understanding the true import of the pertinent and applicable instructions issued by the Government of India, quad hoc, issuance of gun licences to citizens.

2. I have heard Sri.P.Sanjay, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the fourth respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

3. Even an exfacie examination of Ext.P8 order would show that the rejection of petitioner's application has been founded on certain specific instructions issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is produced as Ext.P9. The Commissioner of Land Revenue appears to have understood the said instructions to mean that only a person who faces “grave and imminent threat” to his life may be given a gun licence. If this was th