IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.01.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

W.P.No.15659 of 2020

A.Raja

... Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government,

Home Department,

Secretariat, Fort St.George,

Chennai 600 009.

2. The Additional District Magistrate &

The District Revenue Officer,

Collectorate, Namakkal.

... Respondents

Prayer:

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the

records in relation to the impugned order in GO (D) No.455 Home

(Pol XIII Department dated 04.03.2020 passed by the 1st

respondent rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner seeking

for renewal of gun licence quash the same with a consequential

direction directing the second respondent to renew the gun

licence of the petitioner bearing No. SBBL Gun Licence No.

R.358/91.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthil

For Respondents

: Mr.P.Gurunathan

Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking issuance of

writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in

relation to the impugned order in GO (D) No.455 Home (Pol XIII

Department dated 04.03.2020 passed by the 1st respondent and

quash the same and further direct the second respondent to renew

the gun licence of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is a co-parcener in an agricultural land

comprised in S.F.No.30/6 of Tho.Pachudaiyampalayam Village,

Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District, measuring an extent of 5.21

acres as well as in S.F.No.28/2C of the said Village by virtue

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

of a Release Deed executed by the petitioner’s sister in his

favour and in favour of his father. Since there was apprehension

of threat to his life and property, he applied for gun license

and the same was granted on 30.12.1998 in S.B.B.L.Gun License

and subsequently it was periodically renewed once in a three

years upto 31.12.2016 by the 2^nd respondent. Thereafter, the

petitioner submitted an application on 24.11.2016 for the

renewal of the said gun license for a period of three years from

01.01.2017 to 31.12.2019 to the 2^nd respondent and the said

application was rejected by the 2^nd respondent vide order dated

13.07.2017, on the ground that the petitioner does not own any

property. Aggrieved by the said rejection order, the petitioner

had preferred an appeal before the 1^st respondent on 10.08.2017,

however, the petitioner did not receive any response from the 1^st

respondent and hence, the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition

in W.P. No.28236 of 2018 before this Court and this Court vide

order dated 29.10.2018, directed the 1^st respondent to dispose of

the above appeal within a period of eight weeks. Accordingly,

the 1^st respondent passed the impugned order dated 04.03.2020,

dismissing the petitioner’s appeal. Aggrieved with the aforesaid

impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent, the petitioner has

filed this Writ Petition.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that the petitioner has fulfilled all the statutory

requirements for grant of renewal of the gun license in line

with the periodical renewals made in the past years without any

adverse remarks against the petitioner. While being so, the 1^st

respondent without appreciating the material facts has

mechanically passed the impugned order vide G.O.(D).No.455, Home

(Pol XIII) Department dated 04.03.2020, as if the petitioner

made fresh application for gun license for the above said

period, forgetting the fact that the petitioner has sought for

renewal of license and hence the matter may be remanded back to

the appropriate authority for fresh consideration.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for

the official respondents on instructions submitted that the 1^st

respondent has passed the order mistake