PATHAK,J. - (1.) JUDGEMENT This Special Appeal has been preferred against the judgement of a learned Single Judge allowing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
(2.) THE respondent carries on business as an arms dealer at Gorakhpur under the name Gorakhpur Arms Corporation and at Lucknow under the name Indian Arms Corporation. The licences held by the respondent in the name of the Gorakhpur Arms Corporation in Forms Nos. IX, X, XII and XIII and in the name of the Indian Arms Corporation in Forms Nos. IX, X and XII expired and the respondent applied for their renewal. The State Government by two separate orders dated August 17, 1964 refused to renew the licences. The orders purported to be under Section 14(1)(b)(i)(3) of the Arms Act. 1959 read with Section 15(3) of that Act. The orders declared that the State Government had reason to believe that the respondent was not fit to hold the licences. It came to that belief on information which appeared to show that the respondent had contravened the conditions of the licences The orders alleged a number of transactions in breach of the licences and falsification of the stock registers maintained by the respondent. The respondent filed a petition for certiorari against the orders of August 17, 1964. The writ petition has been allowed by Broome, J. He has held that the State Government was bound to afford a hearing to the respondent before renewal was refused, and as that opportunity was not extended he has quashed the impugned orders and directed the State Government to consider the respondents renewal application afresh and, if grounds for refusal were found to exist to inform the respondent of them and give him an adequate opportunity of being heard before final orders were made.
(3.) THE State of Uttar Pradesh now appeals.;