IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 21795 of 2007(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- LATHAKKUMARI, D/O RAJAMMA, SURESH BHAVANAM, PUTHOOR P.O., THEKKUMPURAM, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.ALEX RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 21795/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.P1-14229/05 DATED 6/7/05 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TAHSILDAR, KOTTARAKKARA TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. EXT.P2 : TRUE OCY OF THE REPORT O.3902/04 DATED 23.1.05 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL OFFICER FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.E1-34958/04-Q/5518/05 DATED 6.6.05 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT I WPC 32405/06 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.M7-10317/2007 DATED 20.04.07 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 21795 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner had applied for a licence under the Explosives Act. The Superintendent of Police, Kollam by Ext.P3 reported to the District Collector that the petitioner’s husband, Sri.Sivadasan, had an explosives licence in respect of which he is involved in Crime No.849/03 under Section 5 of the Explosives Substances Act and that he is now attempting to obtain an explosives licence in his wife’s name for his own use since he cannot obtain one for himself in view of the criminal case. Based on the same the District Collector rejected the application for licence by Ext.P5 order. Petitioner is challenging Ext.P5 order. According to the petitioner, simply because her husband is involved in some crime, she cannot be denied licence since she in her own right is entitled to apply for and obtain a licence. 2. A counter affidavit is filed by the 1st respondent supporting Ext.P5 order. Certainly, as an individual, a wife is entitled to apply for a licence in her own name. But her eligibility for licence has to be WPC :21795/07 -:2:- considered on the basis of all attendant circumstances, especially since the licence applied is under the Explosives Act. By virtue of the licence, the petitioner is given a right to deal with very dangerous substances, mishandling of which would cause danger to public safety and property. The petitioner does not dispute the fact that the petitioner’s husband had an explosives licence in respect of which a crime is pending under the Explosive Substances Act. The Superintendent of Police had reported that the husband himself is trying to obtain a licence in the name of his wife, since it is impossible for him to obtain a licence on account of the earlier violations found to have been committed by him. 3. I am of opinion that while considering the eligibility of the petitioner for licence the same is a very relevant factor, especially in view of the fact that the licence is to be issued for dealing with explosives which may endanger public life and property. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb