BRAJESH CHANDRA AWASTHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) This writ petition is directed against the order passed by District Magistrate, Etawah rejecting petitioner's application for grant of firearm license.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner stressed that petitioner is an Advocate and also a political activist. He does not dispute that he already possess a firearm license whereupon he possess 315 bore rifle but contends that under law a person can have three firearm licenses and, therefore, the authorities below have committed patent error by depriving and denying firearm license to petitioner only on the ground that petitioner already possessed a firearm license and weapon with him. He placed reliance on Apex Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Vs. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala and others, 2002 1 SCC 633 and contended that where a statute vests certain power in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, the power has to be exercised only in that manner and not otherwise. He also placed reliance on this Court's decisions in Ganesh Chandra Bhatt Vs. District Magistrate, Almora, 1993 AIR(All) 291 Sunil Shukla, Advocate Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2010 1 AllCriR 417; and, Ram Chandra Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2010 1 AllCriR 1078.