Refusal to Vary Conditions in an Arms Licence.

[goodboy_mentor]

I am not surprised by the question put forward on this forum or the claim of asur74 about what he is, since this kind of arbitrary behaviour to refuse or deny licenses by licensing authourities has become a "norm" these days. If one reads the following thread will get a better idea about the pathetic situation created by licensing authourities: http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15087

Since under Arms Act 1959, the licensing authourities have been over delegated discretionary powers to the point of being ultra vires, they have practically gone berserk. Following is just the tip of iceberg about what is going on in this country, like arms license applicants are forced to undergo sterilisations:

Re: Arms license for Family Welfare: Gorakhpur DM suspended

In [email protected], utkarsh sinha <skutkarsh@..
.>
wrote:
>
> Arms license for Family Welfare: Gorakhpur DM suspended Lucknow, July 17: District Magistrate of Gorakhpur Rakesh Kumar Goel was Tuesday suspended for allegedly promising to sanction arms licence to two members of minority community if they adopted family welfare norms.
>
> Taking a seriously view of the matter, Chief Minister Mayawati suspended Goel with immediate effect and ordered an inquiry into the entire incident.
>
> Family Welfare was a voluntary programme and procuring arms licence was one's right to personal security, Mayawati said adding there was no government scheme which promised arms licence for promoting Family Welfare schemes.
>
> The way the DM had promised to give arms license was indicative of his irresponsible behaviour and an attempt to mislead minority community, a press statement quoted her as saying.

Source: http://health.dir.groups.yahoo.com/grou ... ssage/1431

Three months ago, officials in three districts of Uttar Pradesh, India's largest and most populous state, announced that to obtain a single-barrel shotgun, two people would need to be sterilised; for a revolver licence, the price would be five.

What happened to the quintet of farm workers perspiring in the fields around the village of Shash*tanda appears to be the unhappy result of the radical policy. In late July, a rich farmer seeking a gun licence is said to have had all five forcibly sterilised at a nearby clinic.

Source http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/no ... deepramesh

Government officials in the central Indian state of Madhya Pradesh have begun offering fast-track gun licenses to men who agree to undergo sterilization

Source http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... incentive/

Such is the present condition of our fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India

[jpc]

The view of the Home Department is wrong. Section 18 (1) of the Arm Act , 1959 itself provides that any person may prefer an appeal against the order of licensing authority .Section 18(1) reads asunder,
“any person aggrieved by an order of licensing authority refusing to grant a license or varying the conditions of a license or by an order of licensing authority or authority to whom the licensing authority is subordinate , suspending or revoking a license may prefer an appeal against that order to such authority ( hereinafter referred to as the appellate authority) and within such period as may be prescribed:”

Rule 53 of Arm Rules , 1962 is for variation of conditions of licenses.

Rule 55 of Arms Rules , 1962 starts with – “In any case” in which an authority issue an order,-

Here , it is noticeable the meaning of word “in any case” . The word “any” means all types of order of licensing authority. Rule 55 does not excludes the order of licensing authority given in the case of “varying the conditions of license”. Rule 55(b) also clarifies the same that appeal can be filed before appellate authority.

Circular issued by the department have no binding effect on judicially or applicant , if against the mandatory provisions of the statute.