K.L. Sharma, J. - (1.) By the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 23-6-63 (Annexure-6) passed by the District Magistrate, Unnao, and the order dated 18-9-8-passed by the Commissioner, Lucknow Division contained in Annexure-11 to the writ petition.
(2.) According to the averments in the writ petition the petitioner was granted fire arm licence in 1973 by the District Magistrate Unnao for keeping and holding a single barrel gun Prior to the grant of arm licence to the petitioner, a dacoity had taken place in the house of the petitioner wherein the petitioners eldest son Randhir Singh, aged 28 years was murdered. The petitioner lodged F.I.R. against the dacoits and named one Ram Swaroop son of Budha of his own village involved in the said dacoity. In the year 1977 Ram Swaroop son of Budha who was one of the accused persons in the dacoity of 1973 was murdered by some unknown persons, and the petitioner was also implicated falsely in the murder of Sri Ram Swaroop. The police submitted a report against the petitioner for suspension/cancellation of the petitioners fire arm licence. The learned District Magistrate Unnao passed a composite order/show cause notice on 19-12-77 .(Annexure-1) placing the petitioner's firearm licence under suspension with immediate effect on the basis that the petitioner was involved in a murder case. The petitioners submitted his explanation written statement to the show cause notice on 30-1-78, but the District Magistrate Unnao cancelled the petitioners firm arm licence by his order dated 23-6-83, and the matter remained pending since then. The petitioner was prosecuted for the murder of the a foresaid Ram Swaroop in Sessions Trial No. 762/81 under Section 302,1.P.C., but he was held not guilty and was acquitted along with other accused persons by the Sessions Judge Unnao Vide judgment and order dated 23-2-82 contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition. After being acquitted of the murder charge, he came to know in the month of January 1983 that the Tahsildar Hasanganj is making enquiry in the matter of suspension/cancellation proceedings of the fire arm licence of the petitioner. He then submitted an application on 28-1-83 for the termination of the proceedings of suspension and cancellation of his licence, but the suspension and the cancellation of the licence was not reovked by the District Magistrate respite petitioners acquittal of the murder charge. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Divisional commissioner against the impugned order of cancellation passed by the Additional District Magistrate Unnao, but the Commissioner also dismissed the appeal of the petitioner. It has been stated that since tire petitioner was not involved in any other crime and there was nothing adverse against him, he became entitled to the restoration of his fire arm licence after his acquittal of the solitary murder charge by the competent sessions Court, and the impugned orders suffer form illegality passed on the basis of baseless and unjustified report of the police. He, therefore, filed this writ petition for the above mentioned relief.
(3.) A notice of this writ petition was received by the Chief Standing Counsel as early as on 11-12-84, and during these long (about) 10 years the opposite parties have not cared to file a counter affidavit in this case. Therefore, whatever has been averred in the writ petition is hereby taken to be correct version of the facts. I have heard the learned counsel Shri K. K. Singh for the petitioner as well as the additional Standing Counsel for the opposite parties and perused the record.;