' Liaqat Ali, petitioner, feeling aggrieved of the communication No,ALC/12024 dated 27-6-1992 filed this Constitution petition seeking declaration to the effect that the aforenoted communication is without lawful authority and hence ineffective in law.
2. The necessary facts are that the petitioner who is holding the licence of arms and ammunition dealership applied for enhancement of quota of arms and ammunition and the then acting Home Secretary vide letter dated 8-3-1992 allowed the request. The entry regarding enhancement was also made in the dealership licence. Subsequently it came to light that the officer who was holding the acting charge of the office of Home Secretary being not aware of the complete ban imposed by the Government had granted the request of enhancement of the quantity of arms and ammunition and the Home Department being of the view that the said order was invalid in law, reconsidered the matter and directed to hold in abeyance the order of enhancement till further orders. The District Magistrate ultimately issued the impugned communication dated 27-6-1992.
This led to filing of the Constitution petition.
3. Learned counsel in support of the petition submitted that under the Arms Ordinance, 1965, licence could either be suspended or cancelled and that there is no concept of holding the 1icence in abeyance. This plea is based on misconception. The dealership licence of the petitioner has not been held in A abeyance but it is the order of enhancement of quota passed by the Home Secretary which has been held in abeyance till further orders. This order according to the respondent Government was passed in violation of the order imposing complete ban on the issuance of arms licence. The basic objection of the petitioner is that such an order could not legally be passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the petitioner could not be deprived of the benefit accruing to him under the said order. Such an opportunity even now can be granted as the order of enhancing the quota has been held in abeyance and no order yet has been passed recalling the said order. This situation also requires the concerned Authority to apply its mind properly and pass appropriate order after hearing the petitioner. The Home Secretary is, therefore, directed to pass an appropriate order in this behalf. With these observations, this petition is disposed.