Dismissed

K.Rushishwar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC30 Jun 2016WP/21347/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of this Writ Petition by directing the Home Department to dispose of a pending appeal against the cancellation of the petitioner's arms license, preferably within three months, noting alleged delay of nearly three years.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.1 to dispose of appeal Inward No.25334 dated 12.08.2013 against cancellation of arms license preferably within 3 months.

K.Rushishwar Vs The State of Telangana — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No. 21347 of 2016

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Writ Petition came to be filed with the following

¶5

prayer:

¶6

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1^st respondent in not disposing of the appeal presented on 12.8.2013 against the orders of the 2^nd respondent canceling the petitioner’s Arms Licence dated 9.11.2012 even after lapse of almost 3 years from the date of its presentation and four months from the date of submission of reminder seeking early disposal of the appeal on 26.2.2016 as being illegal, arbitrary and is in violation of principles of natural justice and fair play apart from in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal presented on 12.8.2013 within a time frame, and pass..”

¶7

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the State of Telangana appearing for respondents. At the request of both the counsel, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.

¶8

3. Grievance of the petitioner is that though he preferred an appeal before respondent No.1 on 12.08.2013 against an order dated 09.11.2012 passed by respondent No.2, cancelling his arms license, no orders

¶9

are passed in the appeal. Hence, he seeks a direction to respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal preferred by him. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents submits that respondent No.1 has to pass appropriate orders in the appeal, provided the appeal is still pending.

¶10

4. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal with Inward No.25334, dated 12.08.2013 preferred by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Rule 5 (1) (c) of the Arms Rules, 1962, against the order dated 09.11.2012 passed by respondent No.2 cancelling his arms license, in accordance with law, if the same is pending consideration, as early as possible preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in the Writ Petition shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

¶11

______________________ C.PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

¶12

30.06.2016 DRK

¶13

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶14

W.P.No.21347 of 2016

¶15

30.06.2016

K.Rushishwar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Rushishwar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagasarapu Krishna, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kura Gouri Shankar, Vs The State of Telangana rep by Principal Secretary

Mohd. Farooq Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal

Mruthinti Ramakrishna Sastry, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary

Md. Yahiya Pasha Vs The State of Telangana

Rajendra Prasad alias Raju Vs State of Telangana