Attau Rahman Masoodi, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Manish Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
(2.) The petitioner had a valid licence for the sale of arms and ammunition till the year 2002 when it was placed under suspension by an order dated 01.06.2002. The suspension of licence by the order dated 01.06.2002 gave rise to W.P.No.3298(M/S) of 2002 which was disposed of by this Court on 07.10.2002 directing the District Magistrate to decide the petitioner's representation filed against the order of suspension. Since no order was passed by the District Magistrate in compliance of Court's order dated 07.10.2002, the petitioner applied for renewal of his licence which remained unattended. Resultantly, the petitioner filed another W.P.No.103(M /S) of 2002 for consideration of renewal of his licence wherein the order dated 01.06.2002 was also challenged but an evasive tactics was again adopted by the state authorities. The petitioner filed yet another writ petition bearing no.175(M/S) of 2003 which was disposed of by order dated 23.03.2007 directing the District Magistrate to decide the petitioner's pending application for renewal afresh.
(3.) The District Magistrate in compliance of order passed by this Court on 23.03.2007, issued an order dated 07.07.2007 informing the petitioner that the application for renewal had already been rejected by an order dated 29.11.2002. The petitioner feeling aggrieved filed W.P.No.4484(M/S) of 2007 challenging the order dated 29.11.2002 read with the order dated 07.07.2007 passed by the District Magistrate. The petitioner also assailed the order of suspension passed on 01.06.2002 before this Court in the above writ petition. The writ petition filed by the petitioner as mentioned above was finally decided on 18.05.2010, the operative part of which reads as under:- "In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 1.6.2002, passed by the opposite party no. 2, is wrong and not sustainable in the eye of law. Consequently the noting dated 25.11.2002 and the order dated 7.6.2007 are also wrong. The writ petition is allowed. Consequences shall follow. With respect to the renewal of the licence, since the matter is already under consideration before the concerned authorities, therefore, no further direction is required to be issued. However, it is expected that the concerned authorities will consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law.";