AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren
Heard Mr. M. Pattu Rajan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as Mr. S.C. Herold Singh, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent had pointed out that there is an appellate remedy provided, u/s 18 of the Arms Act, 1959, to challenge the impugned order of the respondent, dated 10.03.2010. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had not refuted the said statements made by the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent.
In view of the said statements made by the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. However, the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal before the appropriate authority, as per Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959, within 15 days from today. On such appeal being filed by the petitioner, it is expected of the appellate authority to dispose of the said appeal, as expeditiously as possible.