MANOJKUMAR TRIBHOVANDAS TAILOR vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

SCA/20140/2018HC GujaratGJHC24075986201830 April 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the impugned order by the Joint Secretary (Appeals) recorded that the petitioner had not taken training for operating weapons nor produced an NCC certificate. It also mentioned the petitioner's low income based on income tax returns, but acknowledged that the issue of his Rifle Club membership was not considered. At this juncture, the petitioner expressed his willingness to approach the licensing authority again with necessary particulars to substantiate his claim of being an active member of a 'Rifle Club' for sports. The Court held that it is open for the petitioner to approach the licence issuing authority with a fresh set of evidence. The licencing authority shall reconsider the petitioner's case on its own merits after granting an opportunity of hearing within three months of the fresh application. The impugned orders will not impede the fresh consideration. The petition is partly allowed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Manojkumar Tribhovandas Tailor, applied for a firearm licence on July 27, 2015. His application was rejected by the District Magistrate, Navsari, on February 20, 2016. He then filed an appeal before the Joint Secretary (Appeals), Home Department, which was also rejected on October 24, 2018. The petitioner challenged these orders by filing a Special Civil Application before the High Court of Gujarat. The petitioner's business involved travel for money collection, sometimes at night, and travel between his residence and business premises. He was also a life member of the Rifle Association, Navsari, and had received training in operating weapons, with no prior complaints against him.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned orders rejecting the firearm licence application and appeal are sustainable in law, considering the petitioner's business requirements and his membership in a Rifle Association. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that his business necessitates travel for money collection, often at night, and requires him to travel between his residence and business. He also highlighted his membership in the Rifle Association, Navsari, and his training in operating firearms, supported by a certificate, stating there were no complaints against him. He contended that the licensing authority did not properly consider his Rifle Club membership. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the revenue (State of Gujarat). However, the reasoning in the impugned orders, as noted by the Court, suggests concerns regarding the petitioner not having taken training or produced an NCC certificate, and his low income as per income tax returns.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Article 226

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/SCA/20140/2018 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20140 of 2018

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Sd/- ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? No 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ? No ================================================================ MANOJKUMAR TRIBHOVANDAS TAILOR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ================================================================ Appearance: MR RD DAVE(264) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR MEET THAKKAR, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

Date : 30/04/2019

ORAL JUDGMENT 1. RULE. Learned AGP Mr.Meet Thakkar waives service of Rule on behalf of the resondents. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction Page 1 of 4

C/SCA/20140/2018 JUDGMENT to quash and set aside the order dated 24.10.2018 passed by the Joint Secretary (Appeals), Home Department- respondent No.1, whereby order dated 20.02.2016 passed by the District Magistrate, Navsari-respondent No.2 was confirmed. The subject matter pertains to issuance of fire arm licence to the petitioner. 3. The petitioner made application for granting him firearm licence on 27.07.2015, which came to be rejected by respondent No.2 vide order dated 20.02.2016. Against such order, the petitioner preferred appeal before respondent No.1-Joint Secretary (Appeals) being Appeal No.93 of 2016, which also came to be rejected vide order dated 24.10.2018. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is engaged in the business of R.O. water plant, for which he has to travel a lot for collection of money and sometimes, he has to travel with money during night hours also. The petitioner has also to travel between his residence at Bilimora and the plant at Vyara for running business, maintenance and development thereof. 4.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner is a member of the Rifle Association, Navsari and has taken training for operating Page 2 of 4

C/SCA/20140/2018 JUDGMENT weapons like revolver /pistol /rifle. The said Rifle Association has also issued certificate to the petitioner being life member and that he is capable to operate weapons aforesaid. Such certificate was also produced before the DSP. There has no complaint against the petitioner. 5. Heard learned Advocates for the petitioner and perused the documents placed on record. 6. From the perusal of the order passed by the respondent No.1, it appears that in the said order, it is recorded that the petitioner has not taken any training for operating the weapon nor he has produced any NCC certificate. It is also recorded that no member from the petitioner's family is associated with any political party or involved in any offence. Moreover, income tax returns of the petitioner for the last three years show little income. However, the issue of petitioner being member of Rifle Club was not considered. 7. At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to approach the licence issuing authority again i.e. District Magistrate, Navsari-respondent No.1 herein with all the necessary particulars in support of his contention regarding being an active member of 'Rifle Page 3 of 4

C/SCA/20140/2018 JUDGMENT Club' as sports to issue him the licences. It is submitted that the petitioner will be able to substantiate his application and overcome the objections raised in the impugned orders against the petitioner. 8. In view of the aforesaid, it is open for the petitioner to approach the licence issuing authority with fresh set of evidence. The licencing authority shall once again consider the case of the petitioner on its own merits and after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within 3 months of such Application. The impugned order dated 24.10.2018 passed by the Joint Secretary (Appeals), Home Department-respondent No.1 and order dated 20.02.2016 passed by the District Magistrate, Navsari-respondent No.2 will not come in the way of the licence issuing authority to consider the case of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law. 9. The petition stands partly allowed. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. Sd/- (A.Y. KOGJE, J) SHITOLE Page 4 of 4

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →