JITENDRA KUMAR SINGH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BALLIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Singh, J. Heard Sri Shyam Krishan, learned Advocate in support of this petition and Sri A. K. Singh, learned Advocate who appeared as State Counsel.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order of the licensing authority dated 29- 11-2006 by which petitioner's application for grant of fire arm license has been rejected.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the licensing authority refusing to grant license cannot be said to be a valid exercise inasmuch there is complete non-application of mind to the facts and situation and the ground on which petitioner wanted to get license and in fact the licensing authority in a whimsical and manner, instead of applying his own mind and discretion, simply dittoed the report of the arms clerk and the O. C. (Arms ). Lastly it is submitted that the only ground on which the police has not recommended for grant of license is a N. C. R. under on 504, 506 IPC which may not be a valid ground/impediment for not granting the license to the petitioner and in any view of the matter in respect to that the report/complaint a compromise was already filed in the concerned police station which was also placed before the licensing authority to the information of the petitioner but without considering all these aspects in a mechanical manner the impugned order has been passed and thus, this being the situation, there being no dispute about the fact petitioner is not to be relegated to the alternative forum of approaching the appellate authority as it has been repeatedly said by the Apex Court and by this Court also that in appropriate cases availability of the alternative remedy may not come in the way of the petitioner to get the relief from this Court. It is on this premises submission is that this Court is to intervene.