Disposed

Neeraj Rastogi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2025WRIC/2422/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the District Magistrate, Budaun to decide the petitioner's pending arms licence application within two months. The court imposed a daily cost/compensation of Rs. 100 for delay beyond this period.

What did the court decide?

Directed the licensing authority to decide the petitioner's arms licence application within two months, with daily cost/compensation for delay.

Neeraj Rastogi vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:15062

¶2

Court No. - 33

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2422 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Neeraj Rastogi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajai Kumar,Shiv Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.

¶7

The writ petition is filed with the following prayer :-

¶8

" (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 District Magistrate, Budaun to decide the Arms License application of the petitioner, which is pending before him since 2018. "

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has applied for grant of arms licence before the respondent no. 2 in the year 2018, however, till date the aforesaid application of the petitioner has not been decided by the concerned authority.

¶10

It is to be seen that before this Court large number of petitions are being filed for directing the licencing authorities to consider the application for grant of arms licence of the applicants. The aforesaid large number of petitions are indicative of the fact that licencing authorities are not considering the applications for grant of arms licence in a time bound manner. The same may be indicative of red tapism, negligence or corrupt practices. The applications of the citizens are required to be considered by the authorities in a time bound manner so that citizens do not face any difficulty on account of pendency of their applications.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel submits that application of the petitioner for grant of arms licence would be decided in a time bound manner.

¶12

Considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that application of the petitioner for grant of arms licence is pending

¶13

consideration before the respondent no. 2, it is hereby directed that application for grant of arms licence of the petitioner shall be decided by the licencing authority within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is hereby also provided that in the event the aforesaid application of the petitioner for grant of arms licence is not disposed of within the period herein above granted, the petitioner would be entitled to cost/compensation @ Rs.100/- per day (for each day delay after two months) which is to be paid by the respondent no. 2 at the first instance and the same would be recoverable by the respondent no. 2 from the salary of the erring officials. This cost/compensation is in addition to the other legal remedies available to the petitioner including the enforcement of the present order, accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.2.2025 VMA

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Neeraj Rastogi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Rastogi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khursheed Ahamad vs Mobin Ahamad and 13 Others

Manish Mehlotra and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Navodit Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Manish Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ikrar vs State of U.P. and Another