BRAJ BHUSHAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the same in all the three writ applications. As the points involved in all the three writ petitions are more or less the same, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) CWJC No. 3002/2001 has been filed by the petitioner for a direction to the authorities to renew the gun manufacturing licence for the year 2001, CWJC No. 4400/2002 has been filed for a direction to the authorities to renew the gun manufacturing licence for the year 2002 and CWJC No. 10753/2000 has been filed for a direction to grant Transport Licence to transport ten DBBL guns manufactured by the petitioner to M/s. Capital Gun House, Kanpur, a licensed Arm dealer.

(3.) The admitted fact is that the petitioner is engaged in manufacturing of DBBL guns and in the year 1978 he was granted licence under Section 5 of the Arms Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the same was being renewed from time to time under the provisions of Section 15 of the Act till the year 2000. The applications, filed by the petitioner for the renewal of the said licence for subsequent years i.e., 2001 and 2002, have not been disposed of by the authorities, which necessitated the filing of the two writ applications (CWJC Nos. 3002/01 and 4400/02). While the licence for the year 2000 was valid, the petitioner wanted to transport 10 DBBL Guns manufactured by him to M/s: Capital Gun House, Kanpur, a licensed Arm Dealer and prayed for permission from the concerned authority of the State Government, but when the same was not granted, he filed CWJC No. 10753/2000 as stated above.