Disposed

Naini Rajender Reddy v. The State of Telangana and Another

Telangana HC10 Sept 2020WP/12790/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of an unopposed writ petition for delay in disposal of an arms licence renewal appeal. Court directed the Principal Secretary, Home Dept, to consider the appeal and pass reasoned orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st respondent to consider the appeal and pass reasoned orders within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

Naini Rajender Reddy Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 12790 OF 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

NAINI RAJENDER REDDY, S/o. NAINI NARENDER REDDY, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Business and DCC President Warangal, R/o. H.No.5-11-3711 , Naimnagar, Hanamkonda, Warangal District, T.S.

¶9

...pE,rroNER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Dept., Government of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner of Police, Warangal City Urban, Having Office at Hanamkonda, Warangal, T.S.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 1 in not taking action on the appeal of the Petitioner d1.1710312020 for renewal of Arms License as illegal, arbitrary and u n con stitutiona I and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the appeal within 15 days

¶15

lA NO:^'l OF 2020

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1st respondent to consider and dispose by passing appropriate orders on the appeal filed by the petitioner for renewal of arms license dt.17103/2020 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. P. KASHYAP

¶17

Counsel for Respondents: GP FOR HOME

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN^RAO

¶21

WRIT PETITION NO.12790 of 2O2O

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and^learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents.

¶24

Petitioner was granted non-prohibited bore arms licence in the year 2003 and the same was renewed from time to time. The renewal granted earlier expired on 1 1. 1 i.2019 and much before the expiry of renewal period, petitioner applied to renew the licence for further period. However, the request of petitioner for renewal of licence was not accepted and the earlier licence was cancelled by the Order dated 03.03.2020 of Commissioner of Police, Warangal. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner filed appeal before the Principal Secretary, Home Department on 17.O3.2O2O, acknowledged by the said office. However, along with the appeal, petitioner did not pay the fee required for processing the appeal and on 17 .06.2020 petitioner paid the fee.

¶25

The limited grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that the appellate authority is not disposing of the appeal even though six months have elapsed by now. However, learned Government Pleader submits that the appeal preferred by the petitioner could not have been processed till 17 .06.2020 as the appeal fee was not paid by the petitioner and thereafter because of the present pandemic situation, immediately no decision was taken and if reasonable time is granted, the appeal preferred by the petitioner would be considered.

¶26

¶27

Having regard to these submissions, without expressing any opinion on merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Principal Secretary-l"trespondent to consider the appeal preferred by the petitioner on 17 .O3.2O20 and pass orders by assigning reasons in support of the decision, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶28

SD/-K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGIS R //TRUE COPY//

¶29

SECTI N OFFICER

¶30

To, 1 The Principal^{Secretary, HomeDept.,State of Telangana, Secretariat'} Hvderabad.

¶31

Ohe CC to Sri M^{P Kashvap Advocate} IOPUC] iffi cC. to cf for^{Homi:,high cor.t fbr the State of Telangana(oUT)}

¶32

Two CD Copies

¶33

MBC

¶34

\ )-

¶35

HIGH COURT

¶36

DATED: 1010912020

¶37

F 1 H E q 14:
ao
o I
l z
o 1 6 SEP 2m0
.$
*
F.slr,|rI C

¶38

ORDER

¶39

WP.No.12790 of 2020

¶40

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶41

WITHOUT COSTS <sup>u:) .lu G

Naini Rajender Reddy v. The State of Telangana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naini Rajender Reddy v. The State of Telangana and Another

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

Doreti Swapna Vs The State of Telengana

K Rajesh Reddy Vs the State of Tg

Chava Suresh Babu Vs the State of Ts

Ragula Ramulu Vs The State of Telangana

Madhvi C Chandaranna (Noynah) Vs The State of Telangana

Konkala Suresh Vs The state of Telengana