[S. 17 Arms Act] Place Of Business Of Armory Shop Is Only A Condition Of Licence That Can Be Varied By Licensing Authority: Kerala High Court

Section 17 pertains to variation, suspension and revocation of licences. As per Section 17 (1), the licensing authority may suo moto vary the conditions of licence and as per Section 17 (2), the licensing authority may vary the conditions of the licence based on an application submitted by the licensee.

Justice N. Nagaresh observed that neither the Arms Act nor the Arms Rules specify that the licensing authority cannot alter the place of business under Section 17. It thus stated that the licence will not ipso facto lapse if the place of business of the Armory shop is changed to a new address from the existing address.

“Thus, the place of business of an armory is only a condition of licence. Conditions of licence are susceptible to variation in view of Section 17 and only those conditions which are exempted from variation as has been prescribed by law, which cannot be changed. Neither the Arms Act, 1959 nor the Arms Rules, 2016 nor any materials produced before this Court provide that the condition as to place of business cannot be varied by the licensing authority under Section 17 of the Arms Act. Therefore, Ext.P14 communication of the Additional Chief Secretary which states that the licence will ipso facto lapse once the place of licence is varied, cannot stand the scrutiny of law.”

The petitioner was an authorized Arms and Ammunition dealer. The petitioner wanted to shift his existing Armory shop from the existing small room to another convenient room. He submitted representations to the Additional Chief Secretary and District Collector to permit him to change the shop location.

A Police report was called based on the representation filed to the Additional Chief Secretary. The Police report stated that the proposed shop room was equipped with fire protection, an emergency exit, strong room and recommended to permit to shift the Shop. The District Collector also informed the Additional Chief Secretary that it was convenient and safe to shift the shop.

The Additional Chief Secretary rejected permission to change the Armory shop and this was communicated vide a letter of the District Collector. Aggrieved by this, he has approached the Court seeking direction to the Additional Chief Secretary and District Collector to permit the shifting of the Armory shop to new address.

The Government Pleader argued that the location of place of shop was integral in granting licence for Arms and Ammunition and thus he would require a new licence for shifting the place of business.

The Additional Chief Secretary took a stance that the licence was valid only when he carried trade or business at the address shown in the licence and that the licence would lapse if the business was changed to a new location.

The Court found that the licence holder had been using the shop premises since 1957 and that the licence was being renewed periodically. It also noted that it was the authorities who informed the petitioner that the present shop where arms and ammunition were stored did not have facilities to store the huge quantity of Arms and Ammunition.

The Court further observed that the Police Inspector General as well as the District Collector had recommended permitting to shift the shop location to a new address. 

The Court observed that the licensing authority may suo moto vary the conditions of licence or an application submitted by the licence holder. It further stated that conditions prescribed for the grant of licence can be subjected to such variation “except such of them as have been prescribed” as per Section 17 (1) and (2).

The Court on analyzing Arms Rules, 2016 framed under Section 17 of the Act found that it nowhere prescribes that place of business is a condition of licence that cannot be altered or varied by the licensing authority.

“The police as well as the District Collector has reported that the proposed building is suitable and has recommended to permit the petitioner to shift the armory to the new place. Therefore, in the absence of any inhibition or prohibition to vary the licence condition relating to place of business of the petitioner in the Arms Act or in the Arms Rules, the request for shifting cannot be declined unless there is any other factor which disentitle the petitioner to shift the place of business,” added the Court.

As such, the Court quashed the orders issued by the Additional Chief Secretary and District Collector declining permission to shift the Armory shop. It also directed them to permit the petitioner to shift the Armory shop to a new address from the present address by changing the condition of the place of business in the licence.

Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed.

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates Peeyus A.Kottam, Ragesh Chand R.G., Issac Alexander

Counsel for Respondents: Government Pleader Sreejith V S

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 315

Case Title: T Jacob Armory v State of Kerala

Case Number: WP(C) NO. 7106 OF 2024

Click here to read/download Judgment