JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P9 order issued by the 3^rd respondent-Additional District Magistrate. Three reasons have been stated in Ext.P9 for refusing permission to the petitioner for conducting fireworks in connection with the festival of a church. The first is that the petitioner has not maintained a permanent explosive magazine. The second is that the distance from the magazine to the place of display is only 102 meters, as against the minimum distance of 200 meters; and the third, the display of fireworks is located near to a school and a public health centre.

2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court will deal with the third objection, first. Insofar as the existence of the school and public health centre is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the school and public health centre will function during day time, whereas the display of fireworks is scheduled between 9.00 pm and 10.00 pm. The explanation offered is acceptable, and hence that objection cannot stand in the way of the petitioner.

3. Insofar as the first objection with respect to a permanent 'explosive magazine' is concerned, the iss