Ummed Singh And Anr vs Collector, Morena And Anr

Amit Seth, J

Heard on the question of admission.

The instant writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 23/09/2025 passed by the Collector, District Morena, whereby, the arms licenses of the petitioners have been suspended on account of implication of the petitioners in criminal cases.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no effective opportunity of hearing has been afforded to them prior to passing the order impugned and the order impugned is non-speaking, therefore, interference by this Court is warranted.

On the other hand, learned State counsel raises preliminary objection as regards maintainability of the instant writ petition on account of availability of alternate remedy of filing an appeal in terms of section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959. He further submits that the petitioners have rushed to this Court directly without availing the aforesaid remedy of appeal.

Faced with the said objection, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to avail the remedy of appeal against the order impugned. However, he prays that in case the petitioners file appeal before the competent authority, the same may be directed to be decided in a time bound manner.

The prayer appears to be reasonable and is, therefore, accepted.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedy of appeal against the impugned order. In case, the appeal is preferred by the petitioners within 30 days from today then the appellate authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law and shall make an endeavour to expeditiously dispose of the said appeal preferably within a period of 90 days thereafter.

With the aforesaid observation, instant petition stands disposed of as withdrawn.