BHARAT SINGH v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE / LICENSINGH AUTHORIT
WPMS/2577/2018 · 2026-03-11
Pankaj Purohit
Civil Appealbody2018
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2018 DAILYLAW 524 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2018 DAILYLAW 524 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No.2577 of 2018 Bharat Singh
………..Petitioner Vs. District Magistrate/Licensing Authority and another ……..Respondents
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
There is no representation for the petitioner.
2. Mr. N.S. Pundir learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to renew the NPB Revolver/Pistol, 32 Bore F.G.-21969 Licence in favour of the petitioner.
4. A Counter affidavit has been filed by the State and in paragraph 6 of the said counter affidavit, it has been stated that the after receiving the application dated 25.09.2018 of the petitioner for renewal of the licenses of NPB Revolver/Pistol, 32 Bore F.G.-21969, the same has been renewed vide order dated 28.09.2018, the same is also annexed as C.A. 1 to the counter affidavit. Thus, the writ petition of the petitioner has become infructuous as the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
11.03.2026 SK