Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashok Kumar Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 August, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37646
1 WP-12041-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 8 th OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 12041 of 2025
ASHOK KUMAR SAHU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Ms. Warija Ghildiyal - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Sumit Raghuvanshi - Government Advocate for respondents/State.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 07.10.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent No.3 whereby License No.07/2024 granted to the petitioner for possession of explosives has been cancelled on the ground that the gowdown for storage of fireworks is not in accordance with the provisions of the Explosives Rules, 2008. Further the order dated 15.10.2024 (Annexure P/2) passed by the respondent No.2 wherein the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected.
2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that cancellation of license of the petitioner was on the ground that size and place of storage of fireworks is more than the permissible limit. On this pretext, the shop of the petitioner was locked since March, 2024. The petitioner was brought it to the notice of respondent No.3 that the godown was constructed in the year 2011 and the license granted to the petitioner was renewed for the first time in the year 2011 and thereafter it was renewed from time to time. No objection was taken at the relevant time for grant of license or at the time of renewal, however, all of a Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12-08-2025 18:26:29 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37646 2 WP-12041-2025 sudden the impugned order has been passed. The petitioner moved an application to the respondents asking for some time to reduce the size of the godown so that it will come within the permissible limit. However, no such time was granted and the license of the petitioner was rejected.
3. On notice being issued, a reply has been filed by the respondents Nos. 1 to 3. It is pointed out that the Department of Home has issued a circular dated 06.02.2024 whereby it has been directed to strictly follow the instructions contained in letter dated 29.09.2023 issued by the Joint Chief Explosives Controller, Government of India, Petroleum and Explosive Safety Organization, Bhopal. In compliance of the said circular dated 06.02.2024, the respondent No.3 and the Superintendent of Police, Damoh have prepared a joint inspection report and submitted the same before the Principle Secretary, Department of Home vide covering letter dated 07.02.2024. In the said report, it is specifically mentioned that the godown is situated 1 KM away from residential area and distance from petrol-pump and godown is 0.950 meter. There is no proper arrangement of fire extinguisher. In addition to the aforesaid, it is also mentioned in the said report that the petitioner has not produced the stock, sale and purchase register. It was pointed out that godowns belonging to other persons has been sealed on 10.02.2024 in present of the petitioner and others. A panchnama was prepared which contains signature of petitioner. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner pointing out deficiencies as pointed out by the Joint Inspection Team. The petitioner duly submitted his reply on 12.02.2024 and the reply of the petitioner was found not to be satisfactory, therefore, vide order dated 12.02.2024 the license of the fire crackers has been suspended. He was directed to personally appear on 28.02.2024 before the respondent No.3 and thereafter on 15.03.2024 the license has been cancelled. An appeal preferred by the petitioner was also Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12-08-2025 18:26:29 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37646 3 WP-12041-2025 dismissed. It is argued that once the entire inspection has been carried out in presence of the petitioner, coupled with the fact that some deficiencies were found to be violating the circular issued by the Government, therefore, the license of godown was suspended. They have prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. The reason assigned in the order of cancelling the license of the petitioner reflected from the Annexure P/1 is that area and size of the godown of firecrackers is exceeding the permissible limit. The petitioner submitted an application seeking some time to enable him to reduce the area to bring it to the permissible limit in term of the provisions, however, the same was not granted to him. The petitioner is having license which was granted to him in the year 2004 in terms of the provisions of Rule 107 of the Explosives Rules, 2008. The said license has been renewed from time to time. There was no violation of any of the conditions that could be pointed out by the authorities to the petitioner. All of a sudden, the license of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that the area of operation or storage of explosives is more than the permissible limit. The petitioner has moved an application seeking some time to reduce the area and bring it within the permissible limit, however, the same was not granted and the application has been rejected. No other reasons have been assigned while rejecting the license of the petitioner.
6. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner be granted 15 days' time to enable him to bring the area of godown within the permissible limit in terms of the Explosives Rules and thereafter he will submit a detailed representation to the authorities. Re-inspection be carried out by the authorities and thereafter an order be passed by the authorities.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12-08-2025 18:26:29NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37646 4 WP-12041-2025
7. The State counsel fairly submits that the said time can be granted to the petitioner and if the petitioner bring the godown/storage area within the permissible limit, then license can be granted in terms of the Explosives Rules, 2008.
8. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to disposed off the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to carry out changes in the storage of explosives and bring it within the permissible limit in terms of the Explosives Rules, 2008 and the provisions contained in Explosives Act, 1884 and thereafter submit a fresh application to the authorities. The authorities are at liberty to carry out the inspection again and if the godown or storage area of the petitioner is found within the permissible limit, the authorities are directed to grant license to the petitioner. The entire exercise be completed within 15 days thereafter from the date of receipt of representation submitted by the petitioner after carrying the required changes.
9. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12-08-2025 18:26:29