Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. One common order, passed on 7-7-1990 is the root-cause of the grievance which 32 petitioners have made, separately and/or jointly, in seven petitions heard analogously, being disposed of by this common order. District Magistrate, Bhind, has cancelled by that order, cumulatively, the gun licences issued by Shri R.S. Yadav, Deputy Collector, Bhind; the list appended to the order contained necessary particulars of all those licences.

2. True, some of the petitioners preferred unsuccessfully appeals, while others have approached us directly on the Writ Side, challenging the aforesaid order. In this connection, it may be mentioned that earlier also the same order was challenged in M.P. No. 1917 of 1990 and in the order passed on 29-8-1990 in that matter, this Court expressed the view that even if the impugned order affected 180 persons, that would not vest jurisdiction in this Court to entertain the petition as a Public Interest Litigation. Each of the licensee had the right to challenge in appeal the cancellation order and jurisdiction of the appellate authority could not be usurped by this Court.

3. It may be noted in this connection that only in M.P. No. 349 of 1991, the licence stands renewed up to 31-12-1991; in all other cases, applications for renewal were filed. However, by the impugned order aforesaid, those stand disposed of. Indeed, the Collector's order is that the licences issued being void the applications for renewal were also illegal and void.

4. From the "list" appended to the impugned order, Annexure P/14 of M.P. No. 18 of 1971, we find that licences granted as far back as on 22-8-1985 are cancelled. We also find that on a single day, such as on 13-5-1986, licences were granted wholesale to a large number of persons named at S. Nos. 105 to 171. In his order, District Magistrate stated that the licences were void during the relevant period Shri Yadav was neither A.D.M. Bhind nor in any other manner, he had been empowered or authorised to issue those licences. He also stated that in Police Station, Kotwali, Bhind, F. I. R. was lodged for action to be taken in that regard. He held that the licences being void, possession of arms in virtue of those licences was illegal. Superintendent of Police, Bhind and S.D.M., Bhind were directed to take necessary action in the matter.

19. Before us in this Court, reliance is placed on annexures P/ 3 and P/4 filed in this matter. The first one is the Distribution Memorandum which was District Magistrate (Shri Hoshiar Singh), passing the impugned, order, had drawn up and signed as Collector, on 16-5-1985. Shri Yadav, holding the substantive Officer of "Deputy Collector" was allowed to discharge the duties, among others, of Additional Collector A.D.M., L. A.O., etc., the second one is a radio message dated 27-5-1986 from Bhopal, from Under Secretary to Government, Madhya Pradesh, General Administration Department, addressed to Collector, Bhind of which copy was endorsed to Commissioner, Chambal Division and Shri R.S. Yadav, Deputy Collector. That message states inter alia, "Shri R.S. Yadav (State Civil Service), Deputy Collector (A.D.M.), is appointed to hold current charge of the post of Collector, Bhind in addition to his own duties for the duration of Shri Hoshiar Singh's absence on training".

25. For all the aforesaid reasons, we uphold and confirm order dated 7-7-1990, passed by District Magistrate, Bhind and also the several orders passed by Commissioner, Chambal Division, in the appeals preferred by the petitioners. However, we direct that after the petitioners deposit the weapons acquired and possessed by them severally or after those have been seized from them as per impugned order, the District Magistrate shall consider afresh separately applications of each of the petitioners for disposing of the same in accordance with the provisions of Section 13. This direction we are making because it has been submitted to us that Bhind is a dacoit-infested area and the case of each of the petitioners for grant of a gun-licence to him for his protection has to be examined separately to see if be has a "good reason for obtaining licence" applied for as contemplated under Section 13(3)(b). Obviously, when any petitioner is granted a licence in accordance with law, he shall then be entitled to claim return, as per Section 21(2), of the gun deposited by him or seized from him.