Appellate authority lacks power to suspend an arms licence pending inquiry but may remand for further investigation if implicit in jurisdiction.

1. Petitioner M/s R. C. Gupta and Sons is aggrieved by an order, D/- 16th June, 1976 passed by the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad, in Appeal No 90 of 197576 (Farrukhabad) filed under S. 18, Arms Act . It has accordingly approached this Court for relief under Art. 226 of the Constitution.

2. Petitioner carried on business as arms and ammunition dealer in the city of Farrukhabad under a licence issued to it under the provisions of the Arms Act . On 30-9-1975, office of the District Magistrate, Farrukhabad issued a notice requiring the petitioner to show cause why the licence granted to it be not revoked on various grounds specified therein. In due course, the petitioner submitted its reply and the District Magistrate, Farrukhabad, by its order, D/- 221-1976 directed that the licence issued to the petitioner in Form No '14' (licence for sale custody) be cancelled. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal (Appeal No. 90 of 1975-76) under S. 18, Arms Act , before the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad. The Commissioner found that the Collector had omitted to consider certain relevant salient factors in determining whether or not the grounds on which petitioner's licence was sought to be revoked existed. He observed that it was necessary that the entire case should be looked into by the District Magistrate again very carefully and that the District Magistrate should get the matter enquired into again in detail by a competent Magistrate taking care to reconcile the discrepancies pointed out by him and to pass a fresh order, after taking into consideration the report of the fresh enquiry and any fresh fact brought out. In the result, he remanded the case to the District Magistrate, Farrukhabad He further directed that petitioner's arms licence was to remain suspended till re - disposal of the case by the District Magistrate, Farrukhabad.

3. On behalf of the petitioner, it is contended that while disposing of the appeal the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, neither had the authority to remand the matter for fresh enquiry to the District Magistrate nor could he direct that petitioner's licence should remain suspended pending re - disposal of the case by the District Magistrate.

4. We will first of all deal with the second submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The direct consequence of the order of the Commissioner of Allahabad Division, Allahabad, directing petitioner's arms licence to remain suspended till re - disposal of the case by the District Magistrate is that petitioner's arms licence stands suspended pending enquiry by the District Magistrate into the question as to whether or not the same should be cancelled or revoked. In the case of Chhanga Prasad Sahu v. State of U.P. reported in 1984 All WC 145 : 1986 CriLJ 817 a Full Bench of this Court has ruled that under the provisions of the Arms Act , it is not open to the authorities to suspend an arms licence pending enquiry into the question as to whether or not the same deserves to be revoked. In this view of the matter, the part of the impugned order directing suspension of petitioner's licence pending further enquiry by the District Magistrate cannot be countenanced and deserves to be quashed.

5. We now proceed to consider the question as to whether or not the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, while dealing with an appeal filed before him under S. 18, Arms Act , could remand the case to the Collector for fresh trial in the ligh