APHC010671322025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 34618/2025 Between: 1. V NAGA RAJA, S/O. VENKATA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. CHILAKAMPALLI VILLAGE, CHAKRAYAPETA MANDAL, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, VEMPALLI, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VADAPALLI RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not restoring the Weapon license consequent to disposal of the Crl.M.P.No.383 of 2024 in Criminal Appeal No. of 2024 dated 27.1.2025 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Kadapa which was filed against the acquittal orders in C.C.No.158 of 2018 dated 5.11.2019 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Lakkireddypalli, Kadapa District by the Forest Range Officer, Vemula, Kadapa District and handed over the weapon to the petitioner through proceedings dated 12.8.2025 and not allowing the petitioner's representation for renewal citing the reasons that the License was 2 not renewed Vide File No.C3/310/M/2023 dated 23.6.2023 by the 2nd respondent on the ground that the weapon was seized by the Forest Range Officer, Vemula and Chakrayapeta and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to restore the license by renewing and to pass” 2. Heard Sri V.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that no application is pending with respondent No.1 for renewal of the petitioner’s weapon licence in this matter. In fact, the petitioner was called upon to submit an explanation vide notice dated 23.06.2023 prior to the cancellation of the said licence; however, the petitioner did not choose to submit any explanation in response to the said notice. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that nothing is pending for consideration before the District Collector. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh application for consideration. 5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to submit a fresh representation in accordance with law, and upon receipt of such representation, the concerned authorities are directed to take appropriate decision over the matter in 3 accordance with the governing rules and law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:05.01.2026 Asr 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.34618 of 2025 Dt.05.01.2026 Asr