Mitta Bala Bhaskar Reddy, Kadapa District v. District Collector, Kadapa And 3 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S. V. BHATT WRIT PETITION No.21522 OF 2013 ORDER:

Heard Mr. S. Lakshminarayana Reddy, counsel for the petitioner, and Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 2 to 4.

2.

Petitioner complains against the inaction of the 1st respondent in not disposing of application dated 10.01.2012 filed by him for grant of fresh arms license to possess a weapon i.e., NPB Pistol for self-protection. Petitioner places on record Exs.P2 and P3 dated 16.03.2012 and 10.05.2013 to contend that the application dated 10.01.2012 could not be considered by the 1st respondent for want of report from respondents 2 to 4. 3.

The Assistant Government Pleader places on record the instructions dated 03.08.2013 and the operative portion reads thus:

"... It is submitted that pursuant to the report of the Circle Inspector of Police, Kondapuram, the SDPO, Jammalamadugu not recommended to grant fresh arm license to the petitioner herein to possess weapon NPB pistol for the purpose of self protection.

It is submitted that basing on the reports of the SDPO, Jammalamadugu, as well as the Circle Inspector of Police, Kondapuram, the Suptd., of Police, Kadapa, addressed a letter to the District Collector, Kadapa, vide C.No.G2/134/12, dated 22.05.2013, not recommended to grant fresh arm license to the petitioner herein to possess weapon NPB pistol for the purpose of self protection."

4.

From the above, it is clear that the preliminary enquiry and reports were made available to the 1st respondent as early as 22.05.2013. Counsel for petitioner contends that as on date, no order is communicated by the 1st respondent.

5.

I have perused the record.

6.

Prima facie, this Court is of the view that the inaction complained does not substantially subsist in view of the communication dated 22.05.2013 of the 2nd respondent. Since the 1st respondent is the competent authority, it is in fitness of things that the 1st respondent, if not already decided and refused basing on the reports of respondents 2 to 4, is directed to pass orders and communicate to the petitioner in File No.C3/248/M/2012 as early as possible, preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

7.

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

______________ S. V. BHATT, J Date:02.01.2018 KH