SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9359

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
G. MOHANDAS – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The petitioner was having an arms licence which enabled him to possess three weapons. The licence was valid up to 31.12.2021. The petitioner surrendered the guns before expiry of the licence and preferred an application for renewal of licence of two fire arms. On receipt of the renewal application, the first respondent issued Exhibit P2 letter to the second and fourth respondents requiring those authorities to conduct an enquiry and submit report in the prescribed format within 30 days. As there was inordinate delay in taking decision on his application, the petitioner submitted Exhibit P3 before the first respondent, requesting to prompt the second respondent to submit the report at the earliest. As the representation failed to evoke any positive response, details regarding the status of enquiry was obtained under the Right to Information Act. The information revealed that the second respondent had informed the first respondent the reason for delay was the petitioner's failure to respond to answer the query as to the reason for seeking arms licence.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that, unlike an application for fresh licence under Section 14 of the Arms Act

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top