Chattisgarh High Court
Mohammad Asif vs State Of Chhattisgarh 33 Wpc/2864/2018 ... on 22 October, 2018
Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra
Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPC No. 2861 of 2018
• Mohammad Asif S/o Mohammad Yusuf Aged About 43 Years R/o
Golbazar Edward Road, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home,
Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur,
Chhattisgarh
2. District Magistrate, Office Of The Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
WPC No. 2864 of 2018 • Jamna Prasad Yadav S/o Gopal Prasad Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Bramhapuri Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgrah
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgrah
2. District Magistrate Office Of The Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent WPC No. 2873 of 2018 • Pankaj Chourasiya S/o O. D. Chourasiya Aged About 43 Years R/o Chhotapara Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
2. District Magistrate Office Of The Collector, Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent WPC No. 2904 of 2018 • Vikas Nebhwani S/o Mohan Kumar Nebhwani Aged About 34 Years R/o Telibandha Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. District Magistrate Office Of The Collector, Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent WPC No. 2910 of 2018 • Gulam Ahmed Bari S/o Ahmed Husain Aged About 52 Years R/o Shastri Bazar, Baijnathpara Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
2. District Magistrate Office Of The Collector, Raipur Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent WPC No. 2911 of 2018 • Jitendra Nebhwani S/o Mohan Kumar Nebhwani Aged About 38 Years R/o Telibandha Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. District Magistrate, Office Of The Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent WPC No. 2913 of 2018 • Shyamlal S/o B. L. Thakur Aged About 60 Years R/o Behind Old Bus Stand, Ganesh Ramnagar Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgrah
2. District Magistrate Office Of The Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent WPC No. 2914 of 2018 • Abdul Wahid S/o Abdul Mazid Aged About 47 Years R/o Churi Line, Golbazar Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgrah
---- Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhvan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgrh
2. District Magistrate Office Of The Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgrah
---- Respondent For Petitioners Shri Navin Shukla, Advocate For Respondent-State Shri Shashank Thakur, GA Hon'ble Justice Mr. Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 22/10/2018
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners' application for renewal of explosive license is not even received for consideration by respondent No.2 i.e. the District Magistrate, Raipur, even though the petitioners had already deposited the requisite charges including the license fee. She would refer to the orders passed by this Court in WPC No.2422 of 2017 (Fataka Vyapari Sangh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and another) decided on 5.9.2017 as well as WPC No.706 of 2016 (Manish Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected petitions, decided on 13.5.2016, to argue that the respondents are obligated in law to consider petitioners' application for renewal of explosive license.
2. Considering the entire facts situation of the case, particularly in view of the orders passed by this Court in the above writ petitions, the present writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to receive the petitioners' application for renewal of explosive license as and when it is presented and thereafter, decide the same by a reasoned order expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of application for renewal of license.
Sd/-
(Prashant Kumar Mishra) Judge Nirala