KANHAIYALAL AZAD Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KANHAIYALAL Azad has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order passed by the City Magistrate, Ajmer, refusing to renew the petitioner's licence for a revolver.

(2.) THE facts relied on by the petitioner are that he was granted the licence in 1950 which was renewed from time to time until December 1953. That an application for further renewal was submitted by him, but on 30-12-1953 he received the District Magistrate's letter dated 23-12-1953 directing the petitioner to deposit the revolver in question. A request for communication of reasons of this order cancelling the licence was rejected by the District Magistrate without assignment of reasons on 27-1-1954. On 8-1-1954, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Chief Commissioner, but the order of the District Magistrate was upheld on 15-1-1954. A further representation to the Government of India on 10-2-1954 was turned down, vide District Magistrate's letter dated 29-6-1954. On 67-1954, the petitioner was further informed by the District Magistrate that refusal to renew the licence is treated as cancellation of the licence. The petitioner prays for a writ in the nature of a writ of certiorari, mandamus or any other similar direction quashing the orders of the District Magistrate and the Chief Commissioner and ordering restoration of the revolver and the licence". It is urged that the order is illegal inasmuch as no reasons have been recorded for deeming it necessary for the security of the public peace to cancel or refuse such licence.

(3.) IN the reply, the respondents have urged that the District Magistrate had full discretion to renew the licence and is not by rule 41 of the Indian Arms Act (Rules?) required to give any reasons. That the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as he has not contended that the order passed by the Chief Commissioner Is illegal. That the Chief Commissioner's order shows that the petitioner's case was considered on merits. That it is not necessary for the District Magistrate to record any reasons for refusing to renew the licence much less to show that renewal was being refused on account of security of public peace. That the order is an executive' order and this Court has no jurisdiction to intervene.