INDIAN ARMS RULES
Variation of conditions of licences
(1) On application
from a licence- holder, a licensing authority may extend the
area of validity specified in his licence, if he is satisfied
about the need of such extension, subject to the condition
that the licensing authority has the power to grant a licence
in relation to the area to which extension is sought.
(2) On application
from a company holding a licence in Form II or form III for
a change in the name of the member, agent or other representative
of the company in whose name the licence has been granted
or of a retainer included in the licence, the necessary amendments
may be made in the licence by the licensing authority.
For the relevant provisions of the Arms Act, 1957, see Sec.
(1) Every licence may, at its expiration
and subject to the same conditions (if any) as to the grant
thereof, be renewed by the authority mentioned in Sch. II
and renewing authority.
[Provided that the licence so renewed may
be signed in the appropriate column of the licence by such
officer as may be specially empowered in this behalf by the
State government under rule 4.]
(2) The authority issuing a licence
shall ordinarily be responsible for watching all future renewals
of the licence. Where a licence is renewed by an authority
other than the authority who granted it, the former shall
forthwith inform the latter of the fact or renewal and the
period for which such renewal is valid. The applicant for
the renewal. of a licence under this rule shall always be
required to state his permanent residence, and, if he notifies
a change in his permanent residence to the district in which
the renewal is sought, the licensing authority of such district
shall hence-forward become responsible for watching all future
renewals of his licence and shall inform the original issuing
authority accordingly. The procedure shall be repeated on
each subsequent occasion of renewal of the licence, the necessary
intimation being sent by the renewing authority to the original
issuing authority or to the authority who last renewed the
licence on a permanent change of residence, as the case may
(3) An application for renewal of
a licence for arms or ammunition deposited under sub-rule
(1) of rule 47 may be made by the depositor, or where it is
not practicable to make the application direct, through the
dealer or any other person authorized by him in this behalf,
while the arms of ammunition continue to be so deposited.
(4) The licensing authority may consider
an application for renewal of a licence, if the period between
the date of its expiry and the date of application is not,
in his opinion, unduly long with due regard to the circumstances
of the case, and all renewal fees for the intervening period
are paid; other wise the application may be treated as one
for grant as one for grant of a fresh licence.
Note- This rule provides for the
renewal of licences, See Sec. 15 (3) of the Arms Act, 1959.
55. Appeal against the order
of a licensing authority or an authority suspending
or revoking a licence under Sec. 17 (6)
In any case in which an authority issues
(a) refusing to grant or renew
a licence or to give a no-objection certificate for such grant
or renewal, or
(b) varying any condition
of a licence or suspending or revoking a licence under sub-section
(1) or sub-section (3) or sub-section (6) of Sec. 17, the
person aggrieved by such order may, within thirty days from
the date of issue of the order, and subject to the proviso
to sub-section (2) of Sec. 18 prefer an appeal against that
order, to the concerned appellate authority.]
Where the government would appear to have
decided that for the present there need only be one shop for
the sale of arms and ammunition in a particular district,
the communication addressed by the Collector to the petitioner
informing him that his application for a licence for opening
of arms and ammunition shop in that district is rejected,
is merely consequential upon the direction by the Government
to grant the licence to another dealer.
The communication of the collector is not,
therefore, an order passed under rule 41 (1) (a) and
that being so, the question of his not recording the reasons
for the refusal as required under rule 41-B(a) will
Under Art. 19(1) (g) of the constitution
there is fundamental right vested in a citizen to carryon
any business subject to reasonable restrictions. It cannot
be disputed that the State is entitled to impose restriction
on the sale or keeping for sale of fire-arms and ammunition
by introducing the system of licensing as provided under the
Arms Act and the rules made thereunder. Reliance is placed
on the decision of Subbarao, J., in Narasimlw Reddy v.
District Magistrate, Cuddapah, where the learned Judge
has held that the licensing machinery would be a reasonable
restriction only if the reasons where recorded.
Rule 41-B in so far as it provides for
a reference by the licensing authority of an application to
the Government is ultra vires the Arms Act and the
rules made there under as being repugnant to the said provision
is untenable. The arms Act does not in terms provides for
a licensing authority. Sec. 17 provides for rules to be made
by the Government prescribing the licensing authority. In
exercise of that power the Government have prescribed the
licensing authority under rule 26 vesting the said licensing
authority with the power either to grant a licence himself
or make a reference to the Government. It cannot, therefore,
be said that the provisions under rule 41(1) (b) is
inconsistent with or repugnant to the provisions of the Act
or the rules.
Interference under Art. 226 of the Constitution
is discretionary. The High Court does not interference with
the order of the statutory authorities unless it is satisfied
that there has been a patent lack of jurisdiction or an error
of law apparent on the face of record, or that some principle
or natural justice has been violated. It would not also interfere
as pointed out by the supreme Court in Sang Ram Singh v.
Election Tribunal Kotah, to correct errors of law,
which do not occasion injustice in a broad and general sense.
Constitution, Art. 226. - Dismissal
justified on failure to avail practicable an easy remedy.
[Rules. 41 and 41-A of 1951 analogous to rules 54 and 55 of
In principle, a petitioner who refuses
to avail of a practicable and easy remedy provided by law
or statutory rule, should be refused relief under Art, 226,
unless the shows exceptional circumstances, or the extreme
impracticability in that particular instance, of availing
of the apparently straight remedy. An appeal under rule 41
or rule 41-A was particularly appropriate, because the executive
authority immediately superior to the licensing authority
will be able to examine the factual correctness and the sufficiency
of the reasons better than the High Court which is unconnected
with such executive functions. So failure to appeal is particularly
serious in a case like this, and would justify the dismissal
of the petition.
For the relevant provisions of the Arms
Act, 1959, see Sec. 18.
Procedure to be followed by the appellate authority
of an appeal, the appellate authority may call for the records
of the case from the authority who passed the order appealed
against and after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity
of being heard pass final orders.
Note- Sub-section (5) of Sec. 18
of the Arms Act, 1959, lays down. that in disposing of an
appeal the appellate authority shall follow such procedure
that may be prescribed, provided that no appeal shall be disposed
of unless the appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity
of being heard.
This rule lays down that a reasonable opportunity of being
heard should be provided to the appellant.
Appeals shall be governed and regulated in the matter prescribed
by the rules.