# Dr. Ravindra Shukla & Ors v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2014) 3 ILRA 1380
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2014-07-17
- **Bench:** Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, C.J. Dilip Gupta
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/dr-ravindra-shukla-ors-v-state-of-u-p-ors-43136
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Wild Life Protection Act-Section 34(3)-
Grant of fire arm license without approval
of
Chief
Wild
Life
Warden-applicants
residing withing 10 km area of sanctuarysuch practice highly deappriciated-state
government to issue necessary direction to
all
the
District
Magistrate
for
strict
compliance of direction of NOC from CWLW
before grant of fire arm license.
Held: Para-8
We also issue a general direction to the
effect that hereafter, no licence under
the Arms Act, 1959 shall be granted in
3 All].
Dr. Ravindra Shukla & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1381
the State of U.P. without the NOC of the
Chief Wild Life Warden in those areas
which fall within the purview of Section
34 of the Act of 1972. The State
Government shall take necessary steps
to issue directions to all the District
Magistrates concerned to take steps with
reference to those arms licences which
have been granted without complying
with the provisions of Section 34 (3) in
respect of those areas which fall within a
radius of ten kilometers of a sanctuary.

## Text

1380
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
petitioners have not taken part in it. In
counter affidavit filed by the respondent
State, it has been stated that fresh
examination was to be held on 14.9.2014
but during the course of submissions it
has been pointed out that the examination
was actually not conducted on that day
but was conducted on 18th September or
some date thereafter. The respondents
have not brought on record any material
to show exact date of holding of second
examination and whether the date was
intimated to all. The advertisement for
holding of fresh examination mentions the
date as 14.9.2014 but the holding of
examination on some subsequent date
after 14.9.2014 has been claimed, which
also creates doubt as to whether the
subsequent date was intimated to all the
candidates. Nevertheless once this Court
finds that the cancellation of first
examination conducted on 13.7.2014
itself was without any basis and arbitrary,
the
holding
of
any
subsequent
examination will not be material. Even
otherwise all the students in both the
examinations are same and once they
have appeared in the examination on
13.7.2014 and the examination process
was fair and transparent, no prejudice
would be caused if their OMR sheets are
assessed.
37. In view of the discussions and
consideration made above, this Court
finds
the
impugned
action
of the
respondent institute, in cancelling the
examination dated 13.7.2014 to be
without any basis, lacking bona fide, and
based upon non existed material, and as
such, it cannot be sustained. The
impugned
order
dated
17.7.2014,
cancelling the examination held on
13.7.2014 is, therefore, quashed. A
direction
is
further
issued
to
the
respondents to forthwith process the
OMR sheets of the examination held on
13.7.2014, which are lying in the safe
custody of the institute itself, and based
upon the results thereof, the counselling
and admission to Para Medical and
Nursing course be offered, in accordance
with law.
38. Accordingly, the writ petition is
allowed. No order is passed as to costs.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.09.2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT
CHANDRACHUD, C.J.
THE HON'BLE DILIP GUPTA, J.
Civil Misc. Writ Petition [PIL] No. 42084 of
2014
Dr. Ravindra Shukla & Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioners:
Sri Sushil Jaiswal, Sri Rakesh Chandra
Tiwari
Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.
Wild Life Protection Act-Section 34(3)-
Grant of fire arm license without approval
of
Chief
Wild
Life
Warden-applicants
residing withing 10 km area of sanctuarysuch practice highly deappriciated-state
government to issue necessary direction to
all
the
District
Magistrate
for
strict
compliance of direction of NOC from CWLW
before grant of fire arm license.
Held: Para-8
We also issue a general direction to the
effect that hereafter, no licence under
the Arms Act, 1959 shall be granted in
3 All].
Dr. Ravindra Shukla & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1381
the State of U.P. without the NOC of the
Chief Wild Life Warden in those areas
which fall within the purview of Section
34 of the Act of 1972. The State
Government shall take necessary steps
to issue directions to all the District
Magistrates concerned to take steps with
reference to those arms licences which
have been granted without complying
with the provisions of Section 34 (3) in
respect of those areas which fall within a
radius of ten kilometers of a sanctuary.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Dhananjaya
Yeshwant Chandrachud, C.J.)
1. In a petition which has been filed
in the public interest, the petitioners have
highlighted a serious issue relating to the
issuance of arms licences without the
prior concurrence of the Chief Wild Life
Warden, in violation of the provisions of
Section 34 (3) of the Wild Life
(Protection) Act, 19721.
2. A wild life sanctuary by the name
of Hastinapur sanctuary, spread over an
area of 2073 sq km, is situated in the
districts of Meerut, Ghaziabad, Bijnore
and Jyotiba Phule Nagar. The population
of the sanctuary includes various species
of antelope, sambhar, cheetal, blue bull,
leopard, hyena, wild cat and different
types of birds. It also has alligators.
3.
The grievance of the petitioners is
that the District Magistrate, Jyotiba Phule
Nagar (Amroha) has issued arms licences
without observing the requirement of the
prior concurrence of the Chief Wild Life
Warden.
4. Section 34 of the Act of 1972
provides as follows:
"34. Registration of certain persons
in possession of arms.- (1) Within three
months from the declaration of any area
as a sanctuary, every person residing in or
within ten kilometers of any such
sanctuary and holding a licence granted
under the Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959),
for the possession of arms or exempted
from the provisions of that Act and
possessing arms, shall apply in such form,
on payment of such fee and within such
time as may be prescribed, to the Chief
Wild Life Warden or the authorised
officer, for the registration of his name.
(2) On receipt of an application
under sub-section (1), the Chief Wild Life
Warden or the authorised officer shall
register the name of the applicant in such
manner as may be prescribed.
(3) No new licences under the Arms
Act, 1959 (54 of 1959) shall be granted
within a radius of ten kilometers of a
sanctuary without the prior concurrence
of the Chief Wild Life Warden."
5. Under sub-section (1) of Section
34, on the declaration of an area as a
sanctuary, every person residing within a
radius of ten kilometers and holding a
licnece under the Arms Act, 1959, and
even a person exempted from the
provisions of the that Act and possessing
arms, has to apply to the Chief Wild Life
Warden for the registration of his name.
Under sub-section (3), no new licences
can be granted within a radius of ten
kilometers of a sanctuary without the
prior concurrence of the Chief Wild Life
Warden.
6.
The counter affidavit which has
been
filed
by
the
present
District
Magistrate, who has taken charge on 8 June
2014, states that as many as 166 arms
licences were granted in 2005-06, 2006-07
and 2007-08 without a No Objection
1382
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Certificate2 from the Chief Wild Life
Warden. Notices have been issued on 31
May 2014 to all such arms licence holders,
numbering 166. In the case of 33 arms
lience holders, the Chief Wild Life Warden
found that NOC had been issued. In respect
of the balance 133 arms licence holders,
neither has any reply to the show cause
notices been received nor have any NOCs
granted by the Chief Wild Life Warden
been submitted. Consequently, fresh notices
have been issued by the Chief Wild Life
Warden on 29 August 2014 to 133 arms
licence holders for cancellation of licences
as they do not have the NOC of the Chief
Wild Life Warden, and hearing is to take
place on 20 September 2014.
7. We, accordingly, direct that the
competent authority shall take necessary
steps in accordance with law in pursuance
of notices to show cause which have been
issued on 29 August 2014 and even
earlier, in respect of those arms licence
holders who do not have the NOC of the
Chief Wild Life Warden under Section 34
(3) of the Act of 1972.
8. We also issue a general direction to
the effect that hereafter, no licence under the
Arms Act, 1959 shall be granted in the State
of U.P. without the NOC of the Chief Wild
Life Warden in those areas which fall within
the purview of Section 34 of the Act of 1972.
The State Government shall take necessary
steps to issue directions to all the District
Magistrates concerned to take steps with
reference to those arms licences which have
been granted without complying with the
provisions of Section 34 (3) in respect of
those areas which fall within a radius of ten
kilometers of a sanctuary.
9. We also clarify that since the
State Government has referred to the
position of the arms licences which were
granted between 2005 to 2008, in the
event that arms licences were granted
thereafter without complying with the
provisions of Section 34 (3) of the Act of
1972, necessary action shall be taken in
accordance with law.
10. The learned Standing Counsel
shall take steps to transmit a copy of this
order to the Principal Secretary (Home)
who shall take necessary steps for
compliance of this order by issuing
instructions to all the concerned District
Magistrates.
11. The writ petition is, accordingly,
disposed of. There shall be no order as to
costs.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 11.09.2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT
CHANDRACHUD, C.J.
THE HON'BLE DILIP GUPTA, J.
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 47953 of 2014
Swami Brhamanand Saraswati Charitable
Trust & Anr.
.
.Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioners:
Sri Tarun Agarwal
Counsel for the Respondent:
C.S.C.
U.P.
Zamindari
Abolution
&
Land
Reforms Act, 1950-Section-154(2) and
(3)-Petitioner
a
charitable
societysought
permission
from
state
government to purchase more than
12.50 acre land-for residence of student