J U D G M E N T

The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 rejection order passed by the District Collector under the provisions of the Arms Act and Rules, which has been affirmed in appeal by the Land Revenue Commissioner through Ext.P2 order.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent, stating that there is no need for the petitioner to apply for an Arms licence and that, if the petitioner is granted permission for a new weapon, there is every possibility of more people from that area applying for the same. It has to be straight away noticed that these reasons can't be sustained, in the light of Sections 13 , 14 or Rule 13 of the Arms Act and Rules.

3. Under such circumstances, Exts.P1 and P2 orders are quashed with a direction to the 3^rd respondent District Collector to pass fresh orders on the application preferred by the petitioner strictly in terms of the Act and Rules, particularly Sections 13 , 14 and Rule 13 of the Arms Act and Rules. Orders as directed above shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The impugned orders are quashed, and the writ petition is allowed as above.

SD/-