IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 25126 of 2008 Between: Sri Krishna Thataji Rohankar S/o. Thataji Rohankar R/o. H.No. 1-91, Shameerpet, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of A.P. Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Gachibowli, Hyderabad. 3 The Collector & District Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. 4 SHO, PS Shameerpet Cyberabad Commissionarate R.R. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents seeking to cancel the gun license of the petitioner as arbitrary illegal, and consequently direct the respondents to renew the gun license and handover the gun to the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.M.R.VELU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioner states he has arms licence bearing No. MDL-II 75/56 with All India Permit to possess one S/DBBL Gun 12 Bore New IOF tested No.15908/1997. While so, on 17.03.2003, Task Force Police arrested the petitioner on the allegation that the arms licence is fake and illegal, and registered Cr.No.75/2003 against him for the offences punishable under Sections 25 & 30 of Arms Act and under Sections 468 and 471 IPC. Then, the petitioner filed Crl.P. No. 3095 of 2004, and this Court, by an order, dated 14.11.2006, quashed the FIR, and the learned IX MM, Hyderabad, by an order dated 22.9.2003 in Crl.M.P.No.3387 of 2003, granted interim custody of the gun to the petitioner. As the validity of the gun licence was up to 31.12.2004, the petitioner made a representation dated 29.9.2006 requesting the 3rd respondent to renew his licence, and it is his grievance that the 3rd respondent has not passed any orders on his representation till date. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents, has produced before this Court, the proceedings dated 19.3.2009 issued by the 2nd respondent- Commissioner of Police, whereby the 2nd respondent renewed the petitioner’s Arms licence up to 31.1.2010. In view of the proceedings dated 19.3.2009 issued by the 2nd respondent, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition and the same is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the 4th respondent for release of his gun. No costs. _______________ N.V. RAMANA, J. 25th March, 2009 bcj