IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.25101 of 2004 Between: M. Dayananda Reddy, S/o Late M. Chenna Krishna Reddy, R/o Giddangivaripalli Village, Vempalli Mandal, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Collector & District Magistrate, Kadapa, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in cancelling the licence of weapon bearing no. Vempalli -24 by his proceedings no. F.Dis.C3/1391/M/99, dated 5-6-2003 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to renew the licence of the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.PARAMESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.25101 of 2004 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that he is the holder of the gun licence and it has been renewed from time to time. It is stated that the said licence has been issued in favour of the petitioner for protection of crop from wild animals. While so, the 2nd respondent through impugned proceedings F.Dis.No.C3/1391/M/99, dated 05-06-2003, cancelled the gun licence on the ground that the Government issued Memo No.32239/Arms/98-10, dated 28- 10-2002, informing that since hunting of wild animals including wild boar and deer is prohibited under Wild Life (Protection) Act, the concept of gun licence for protection of crops itself does not have any meaning and accordingly, directed all the licensing authorities that the concept of grant/renewal of gun licences for crop protection is abolished. If that being the policy of the Government, I am of the opinion that unless the said Memo is questioned, it cannot be said that cancellation of gun licence, which is obtained for protection of crop from wild animals, is illegal or arbitrary. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the orders of the Government in G.O.Rt.No.682, dated 25-04-2000, a decision has been taken to return weapons to the licensees, after renewing the licences, provided that if they are not involved in any offence and if they are not factionists and if the weapons are not used in any offence. I am of the opinion that the said order of the Government in G.O.Rt.No.682, dated 25-04-2000, has no application to the facts of the present case, as in the instant case, the gun licence has been cancelled on the ground that the agriculturists are not entitled for any gun licence for protection of their crops from wild animals. Therefore, the question whether the agriculturists are entitled for any gun licence for protection of their crops from wild animals, is not the subject matter of G.O.Rt.No.682. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief, unless the said Government Memo, dated 28-10-2002, which has been issued subsequent to G.O.Rt.No.682, dated 25-04-2000, is questioned. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to question the Government Memo, dated 28- 10-2002. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 03-07-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{AVLR}