IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7207 of 1989 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- RANJITSINH DALSUKHBHAI SOLANKI Versus SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR HA RAICHURA for Petitioner (Absent) MR DF JOSHI, ASST. GOVT PLEADER for Respondent No. 1, 3 NOTICE SERVED for Respondent No. 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL Date of decision: 08/09/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT The petitioner approached this Court with a prayer to quash and set aside the order at Annexure 'A' dated 9.9.1988 and to direct the respondents, particularly Sub-Divisional Magistrate to issue licence for the gun pursuant to his application dated 21.10.1987, Annexure 'D'. .RS 2 #. Today, when the matter is called out learned advocate for the petitioner is not present before the Court. Mr. Joshi, learned Assistant Govt. Pleader submitted that looking to the prayer and the interim order, nothing remains to be done in the petition, and the petition has become infructuous. #. At the time of admission of this matter on 12.10.1989, this Court (Coram: M.B. Shah, J. - as His Lordship then was) passed the following order: "Rule. Expedited. By way of ad-interim relief the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Panchmahals at Godhra is directed to consider on merits the application which may be filed by him within 15 days from today for grant of arms in accordance with law after giving him an opportunity of hearing". #. Subsequent to passing of the aforesaid interim order, no grievance is made before the Court either by filing an application or otherwise, to the effect that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate has not considered the application and has not passed an order in accordance with law. Under the circumstances, this petition is required to be disposed of as infructuous. Hence this petition stands rejected as infructuous. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs. csm./ ( B.C. PATEL, J. )