JUDGMENT :

(Nupur Bhati, J.)

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by petitioner for the following reliefs :-

(1) The inaction and unjustified delay on the part of the respondents in renewing of Arms Licence No.217/ADMR/97 and UID No.295000029862232016 of the petitioner may kindly be declared per se unjust, arbitrary and further violative to Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(2) The respondents may kindly be directed to renew the Arms Licence No.217/ADMR/97 and UID No.295000029862232016 of the petitioner on urgent basis.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is an ex-serviceman of Indian Army. The petitioner is aspiring to work as security personnel with private company and for this purpose he requires a gun license.

3. The petitioner has a 12-Bore licensed gun, having Arms Licence No.217/ADMR/97 and UID No.295000029862232016. This license was issued to the petitioner while serving in the Indian Army at Ramban (J&K) on 26.11.1997. The copy of the arms license is placed on record as Annex.2. The arms license of the petitioner was renewed from Nagpur (Maharashtra) and Barmer (Rajasthan) while the petitioner was serving in Indian Army. The petitioner retired after the year 2005 and thereafter he applied before the respondent-authorities for renewal of his arms license (Annex.2) at his home district i.e. Bikaner. The petitioner submitted his original arms license before the respondent-authority along with requisite fees and application. The gun was returned back to the petitioner with an instruction to keep it in safe and not to use it.

4. The petitioner had applied for the renewal of arms license way back in the year 2005 but it was not renewed even after a period of 15 years despite the fact that the police verification of the petitioner has also been done twice.

5. The respondent authorities were under an obligation to renew license of the petitioner within 30 days of verification report of the police personnel, however, nothing was done. The respondents have sent letters to the District Magistrate, Ramban, Jammu & Kashmir but no head was paid to it.

6. The petitioner, thus, being aggrieved of the aforesaid facts and circumstance of the case has preferred this writ petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the Circular of State Government dated 30.5.2019, which is placed on record as Annex.R/1, certain directions have been issued. He further submits that under Clause (2)(vi) of the said Circular dated 30.5.2019, the license can be renewed only after the concerned Authority who had lastly renewed the license verifies it. The relevant extract of the circular is reproduced hereunder :-

(vi) vuqKkiu izkf/kdkjh vU; jkT;ksa ls tkjh 'kL= vuqKki= dk uohuhdj.k djus ls iwoZ vuqKkiu izkf/kdkjh@uohuhdj.k izkf/kdkjh ftlus vfUre ckj uohuhdj.k fd;k gks] ls 'kL= vuqKkiu ds lR;kiu ds i'pkr gh uohuhdj.k djsaxsA bl laca/k esa fo'ks"k lrdZrk cjrsaA**

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities are time and again sending requests for verification to the concerned zuthority at Ramban, Jammu and Kashmir, however, the petitioner's last renewal has been made by the concerned Authority at Barmer, which is evident from a copy of the arms license dated 26.11.1997 (Annex.2).

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court towards Rule 24(1) of the ARMS RULES , 2016, the same is reproduced hereunder :-

"Renewal of licences - (1) Every license may, as its expiration and subject to the same conditions (if any) as to the grant thereof, be renewed b