High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Dayanand Chaudhary v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 18846 of 2006  RD-AH 7296 (5 April 2006)
Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties this writ petition is being disposed of finally without calling for a counter affidavit.
It is the case of the petitioner that he applied for grant of an arms licence on 30.9.2005. It has been submitted that although the reports have been submitted by the concerned authorities but still, although more than six months have passed, the respondent no. 2, District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar has yet not decided the application for grant of arms licence despite the petitioner having filed several representations in this regard.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and with their consent and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction that in case if, with regard to his grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before respondent no. 2, District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar/Licensing Authority alongwith a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent alongwith the application dated 30.9.2005 for grant of arms licence, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of the same.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.