Partap Singh Tinna v. State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-11010-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (104) CWP-11010-2024 Date of decision:- 13.05.2024 Partap Singh Tinna

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Jaswinder Singh Grewal, Advocate, for the petitioner. ...

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral) 1.

By way of present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has approached this Court inter alia for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to take an appropriate action on legal notice - representation, dated 16.11.2023, Annexure P-4, and to decide the application dated 13.01.2021, Annexure P-3, for renewal of fire arms Licence.

2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is holder of a Licence under the Arms Act, 1959, which has been renewed from time to time and was valid till 13.12.2020. He submits that petitioner applied for renewal of the Licence through online portal, Annexure P-3. By referring to letter dated 04.12.2023, Annexure P-6, he submits that after verification, application is pending before the District Commissioner, respondent No.2. He submits that despite a lapse of three years, application is not being decided.

PARDEEP NAUTIYAL 2024.05.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-11010-2024 -23.

Issue notice to the respondents.

4.

On asking of the Court, Ms. Amrita Garg, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Upon instructions from Pradeep Kumar, Senior Assistant, office of Deputy Commissioner, Fazilka, she has confirmed that the application is pending.

5.

Given the nature of order being passed, this Court does not deem it necessary to call for a response from the respondents. 6.

Having heard counsel for the parties, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, to finally decide the application submitted vide E-portal, Annexure P-3, within a period of four months from the date of communication of a copy of this order. 7.

Needless to mention, in case, respondent No.2 comes to the conclusion that the application deserves to be rejected, it shall pass an order assigning reasons for rejection and communicate it to the petitioner. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE 13.05.2024 Pardeep Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes Whether Reportable Yes/No PARDEEP NAUTIYAL 2024.05.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.