AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.—This matter was listed on 28/3/2011. The Court passed following order:
When the matter is called out, no one is present for the applicant. S.O. to 29.03.2011 with a specific observation that no further time shall be granted in this matter and appropriate order will be passed if no one is present.
Today, when the matter was called out none is present for the Petitioner. The Petitioner has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia challenging the order dated 21/5/2005 passed by the State in the appeal being Appeal No. 296 of 2004 in confirming the order dated 23/7/2004 passed by District Magistrate, Bhuj, rejecting his application for seeking license under the Arms Act 1959.
The facts in brief, as they emerged from the memo of the petition and impugned order deserve to be set out here under.
The Petitioner, as he has averred in the memo of the petition, at the relevant time he was serving as Orthopedic Surgeon in G.K. General Hospital, Bhuj. The Petitioner was occupying Government quarter. Petitioner''s wife was studying at Bangalore. Petitioner on account of his perception applied for license for keeping pistol within the State of Gujarat in view of the duty attached to his post. Said application was made to the District Magistrate, Bhuj, vide his application dated 10/12/2003. Said application came to be rejected by concerned authority on 23/7/2004. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the Petitioner preferred appeal to the State which also came to be rejected vide order dated 21/5/2005.
Petitioner has mainly averred that he was holding license for gun in his name vide License No. 372/372 issued by competent authority in the State of Bihar which was valid for State of Bihar only. The Petitioner as he was at the relevant time serving in state of Gujarat he wanted to have a license to keep pistol in the State of Gujarat also. The nature of his duties and the fact that he has to travel alone at long distance, he had to make request for license. Petitioner further submitted that he being discharging duties in medico-legal cases also he had a genuine apprehension that he would be attacked by disgruntled elements.
This Court (Coram: K.S. Jhaveri, J) on 20/12/2006 issued rule. This matter today is listed in the final hearing board. As it is stated herein above, none has remained present for the Petitioner.
The Court is of the view that the order impugned in this petition is not required to be interfered with for the following reasons, namely:
The Petitioner is an employee in the State and was serving as Orthopedic Surgeon in G.K. General Hospital, Bhuj. The narration of duties and his requirement to attend medico-legal cases on some occasion in its would not be sufficient ground for providing him license of weapon.
The authority has taken into consideration the relevant factors and the factor that the report of the competent officer with regard to requirement of license being in negative, license was not required to be issued.
In view of this, I am of the considered view that the order impugned needs no interference and therefore the petition is required to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule discharged.