SANJAY AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the orders dated 25. 8. 2006 passed by appellate authority, Annexure--5 to the writ petition and dated 20. 6. 2006 passed by the District Magistrate, Annexure 4 to the writ petition.

(2.) THE petitioner who was a licensee of a revolver, his licence was cancelled on the ground that his wife and son have purchased a property and have not paid requisite stamp duty and when the Collection Amin visits the house of the petitioner to collect the said amount, the mother and the son of the petitioner threatens the Amin as well as the other officers, who visit for the purpose of realisation of deficient stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 13,89,000/ -. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint by the officials, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner showing therein that under these circumstances why the license of the petitioner be not cancelled. This order was passed on 22. 8. 2005. The petitioner submitted a reply and denied the allegations made in the show cause notice. But in spite of the aforesaid fact the license of the petitioner was cancelled vide order dated 20. 6. 2006. A true copy of the same has been annexed by the petitioner as annexure- 4 to the writ petition. The petitioner filed an appeal and that appeal too has been dismissed. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner for misuse of the fire-arm, therefore, it does not come under the violation of Section 17 of the Arms Act. There is no document to show that the petitioner has ever threatened the employees of the District Administration who visit petitioner's house for the purpose of realisation of the stamp duty. Further submission has been made that a proceeding for realisation of deficient stamp duty was pending and a final order dated 13. 11. 2006 has been passed. A copy of the same has been filed with the rejoinder affidavit by which a final adjudication has been made and the petitioner's liability to pay deficient stamp duty is to the tune of Rs. 68,500/- and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- as well as interest at the rate of 1. 5% per month from 14. 11. 2003 till the date of payment. The petitioner submits that the total amount as calculated comes to the tune of Rs. 1,16,600/- which has already been deposited by the petitioner on 17. 11. 2006. A copy of the same has been filed with the rejoinder affidavit as annexure- 2. In view of the aforesaid fact learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now there is no occasion for maintaining the order of cancellation as it has never been proved by the respondent that the license of the petitioner has ever been misused either by the petitioner or by the family members of the petitioner.