Disposed

M.Joseph v. the Land Revenue Commissioner

Kerala HC5 Aug 2022WP(C)/6172/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner aggrieved by inordinate delay in granting a gun licence required for crop protection against wild animal attacks. The court directed the District Collector to pass orders within two months following statutory procedure and reports of concerned officers, affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd Respondent to pass orders on the gun licence application within two months based on prescribed procedure and officer reports after hearing the petitioner.

M.Joseph Vs the Land Revenue Commissioner — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 6172 OF 2019

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

M.JOSEPH AGED 64 YEARS S/O. SCARIYA RESIDING AT MATHILAKATHU, KARINGADU P.O, THOTTILPALAM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV RESMI NANDANAN

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

1 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-675001.

¶9

2 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, POST CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE673020.

¶10

BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

Gp Riyal Devassy

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶14

ON 05.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P.(C) No. 6172 of 2019

¶16

-2-

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 05^th day of August, 2022

¶19

The petitioner is doing agricultural operations in 4 Acres of land belonging to him. The property is situated adjacent to a forest. According to the petitioner, his crops are getting damaged and destroyed due to wild animals' attack. Hence, for the purpose of protecting his crops and also for self

¶20

protection, the petitioner requires to possess a gun. Though the petitioner submitted an application for gun licence long back, the same is not being considered. This writ petition is

¶21

filed aggrieved by the inordinate delay in passing orders on the application.

¶22

Learned Government Pleader submitted

¶23

that the second respondent had called for a report from the District Forest Officer, which

¶24

W.P.(C) No. 6172 of 2019

¶25

-3-

¶26

was obtained only recently. The second respondent therefore proposes to conduct a hearing, pursuant to which a decision will be taken on the application.

¶27

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, directing the second respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's application for gun licence, following the procedure prescribed under the Arms Act and Rules and based on the reports of the District Forest Officer and District Police Chief.

¶28

Needless to say that the petitioner should be afforded an opportunity of hearing before taking such decision. The decision, as directed above, shall be taken within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

Scl/05.08.2022

W.P.(C) No. 6172 of 2019

¶33

-4-

¶34

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6172/2019

¶35

PETITION	ER EXH	IBITS
EXHIBIT	P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.12.2013 TO THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF.
EXHIBIT	P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.7.2014.
EXHIBIT	P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER ISSUED BY THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30.12.2015.
EXHIBIT	P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.5.2016 OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 8.7.2016.
EXHIBIT	P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.7.2016.
EXHIBIT	P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 6.1.2018.
EXHIBIT	P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.10.2018.

M.Joseph v. the Land Revenue Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Joseph v. the Land Revenue Commissioner

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

Sebastian Thomas Chiramel Vs Union Bank of India

Latha, Vs D.a.Asokan

Shaji K. Vs State of Kerala

T.K.Kareem Vs Smt.Surya Thankappan

K.Aravindan Vs State of Kerala

Kulanada Grama Panchayath Vs the State of Kerala