P.BALAN Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short issue that falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether an order refusing to renew a licence issued under the Arms Act, 1959 (the Act) is appealable under Section 18 of the Act.

(2.) The petitioner is a farmer holding a large extent of property. He is cultivating rubber, coconut, arecanut, plantain, tapioca etc. According to him, animals like pig, porcupine etc. are a constant threat to the activity of the petitioner as they often destroy the crops. Faced with this situation, it is stated that the petitioner had applied for, and obtained a gun licence under the Act during 1983 for a period of three years and the same was being renewed from time to time till 10.5.2016. It is also stated that when the petitioner preferred an application for renewal of the licence for a further period of three years from 10.5.2016, the same was rejected by the licensing authority, as per Ext.P5 order, holding mainly that the petitioner is aged and he cannot, therefore, handle the weapon safely. It is also stated in Ext.P5 order that the tensed political situation and Maoist sightings within the station limits are matters of concern and therefore, the chances of misuse of the weapon by anti-social elements cannot also be ruled out. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order and hence, this writ petition.

(3.) When the writ petition came up for admission, a doubt arose as to whether an appeal would lie against the order impugned in the writ petition. As the said question was relevant for taking a decision as to whether the writ petition should be entertained, the learned counsel for the petitioner was requested to make his submissions on the said question. The learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader were, accordingly, heard on that question.