DHAN PAL JAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) BY means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 19th June, 1997, whereby the State Government has refused to grant arms dealer's licence to the petitioner under Form No. XI, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure '1' to the writ petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner Shri Jain tried to argue that this writ petition deserves to be allowed on the short ground that no reason whatsoever has been assigned in rejecting the petitioner's application for grant of licence, but the petitioner should not be relegated again to the licensing authority in the facts and circumstances of the present case and for this purpose he relied upon decisions of the apex Court, reported in A.I.R. 1967 Supreme Court, 829 Hari Chand Sarda Versus Mizo District Council and another, and A.I.R. 1998 Supreme Court, 2779 National Buildings Construction Corporation Versus Raghunathan and others. He further relied upon decisions of the apex Court, reported in A.I.R. 1985 Supreme Court, 1108 State of U.P. and another Versus Raja Ram Jaiswal and another; and A.I.R. 1985 Supreme Court, 1118 Mohd. Azeem Versus District Judge, Aligarh and others, as well as some other decisions has also been relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner.