The licence was renewed annually and the quota was maintained throughout.
The Government insisted that the guns manufactured by Pritam Singh should undergo proof testing, and for that purpose it became necessary for the manufacturer to purchase and install the necessary machinery and plant.
The petitioner claims that his plea for the restoration of his original quota has been supported by the State Government.
In opposition to the writ petitions, the Union of India which is the sole respondent, relies on an Industrial Policy Resolution of 1956 which envisions an exclusive monopoly in the Central Government in the matter of manufacturing arms and ammunition while permitting existing manufacturers in the private sector to companytinue to carry on their business on a limited scale.
The petitioner cites a number of cases where the quota reduced in the case of other manufacturers has been restored and relies on other material to show that the determination of his quota has been arbitrary.
The machinery was installed shortly after 1960 on a substantial investment of funds raised with great difficulty and, it is said, in the result the factory is number capable of manufacturing 50 guns per month.
Several representations were made to the authorities for the restoration of the original quota but there was numbersatisfactory response.
On the death of Pritam Singh in 1969, the business was carried on by the petitioner and his mother, and the licence number stands in their names.
The facts incorporated in the petition run a materially similar companyrse, except that the original quota granted to the petitioner companysisted of 50 guns per month and has number been reduced to 5 guns per month.
But with effect from the year 1964 the Government of India began to issue the licences.
Under article 32 of the Constitution Parmeswara Rao, G. D. Gupta and Ashwani Kumar for the Petitioners.
The petitioner in the third Writ Petition, No.
834 of 1979 has been filed by Bachan Singh.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition Nos.
Writ Petition No.
Later, with the enactment of the Arms Act, 1959, the licence was issued under that statute.
In his case, the original quota of 50 guns a month has been reduced to 15 guns a month.
Here again, the pattern of facts is substantially similar to that traced in the other two writ petitions.
The guns were manufactured by hand and were number proof tested.
Until the year 1963, the licence in favour of Pritam Singh was renewed by the Government of Jammu Kashmir for the full quota of 30 guns.
835 of 1979, is Uttam Singh.
833 835 of 1979.
833 of 1979 has been filed by Ranjit Singh who alleges that his father Pritam Singh companymenced the business of manufacturing guns in 1950 under a licence issued by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir.
Writ Petition No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATHAK, J. In these three petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioners separately pray for a restoration of the quota originally granted to them in their respective licences for the manufacture of fire arms.
R. Lalit and Miss A. Subshashini for the Respondent.
The licence permitted him to manufacture 30 guns per month.
