JAMES JOSEPH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the Writ Petition is against Exts. P-4 and P-6.

(2.) Exts. P-1 and P-2 show that from 1979 onwards, the petitioner was licenced to store safety fuse and gunpowder. As the licence period was expiring on 31.3.2010, the petitioner applied for its renewal by submitting Ext. P-3, which was rejected by Ext. P4 order, on the ground that the Explosives Rules, 2008 did not permit the sale of gunpowder and safety fuse from a shop. Aggrieved by Ext. P-4, petitioner filed Ext. P-5 appeal before the first respondent invoking the appellate power under Rule 121 of the Explosives Rules, 2008. The appeal was also rejected by Ext. P-6 order, reiterating the ground mentioned in Ext. P-4. It is in these circumstances, challenging Exts. P-4 and P-6, this Writ Petition is filed.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was doing business only in safety fuse and relied on R. 83 and Schedule IV of the Explosives Rules, 2008 to substantiate his contentions. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents and in paragraph of the counter affidavit, it is stated thus: