ORDER M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. In these two writ applications since common question of facts and law are involved, the same are disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 13.6.2000 passed by respondent No. 2 Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi in purported exercise of power under Section 21(3) of the Arms Act and directed for confiscation of the respective gun belonging to the fathers of the petitioners. 3. The case of the petitioner in CWJC No. 2238/2000R is that petitioners father was holding a valid licence of a gun bearing No. 13764 under Licence No. XXXIII-XIX. Petitioners father died on 8.7.1997. Within 15 days of his fathers death petitioner filed and moved an application before the District Arms Magistrate, Ranchi for deposit and safe custody of the gun in question with M/s Ranchi Gun House, an authorised arms dealer until the gun was transferred in the petitioners name after issuance of licence to him. Petitioner deposited the arms on 25.7.1997 with M/s. Ranchi Gun House who granted to the petitioner a receipt for the same. Petitioners further case is that on 26.7.1997 petitioner made application in the prescribed form for grant of licence in his name giving all necessary particulars which was received by the Sonahatu police station on the same day and forwarded to the Inspector of Police. Petitioners application was accordingly forwarded after due recommendation of the Superintendent of Police. It is stated that without disposal of the application of the petitioner for the grant of licence and transfer of ownership of the gun the respondents passed the impugned order whereby the gun of the petitioners father was confiscated on the ground that petitioner did not take any steps for grant of licence in his name and for transfer of gun in his favour. 4. Respondents case in the counter-affidavit is that petitioner did not take any step either for the transfer of gun in his name or ever requested the authority for disposal of the said gun by selling the same even after a lapse of more than three years. It is stated that petitioner never filed any application before the Deputy Commissioner who is competent authority rather petitioner applied directly before the Officer Incharge. Sonahatu Police Station, who is not competent authority in such manner. It is stated that petitioner never filed any application before the Deputy Commissioner who is competent authority rather petitioner applied directly before the Officer Incharge. Sonahatu Police Station, who is not competent authority in such manner. However it is submitted that for the first time recommendation report was received in the office of Deputy Commissioner on 17.3.2000 from the Superintendent of Police. It is stated that petitioner became active only after receiving a notice of confiscation. 5. The cause of petitioner of CWJC 3038/2000R is that his father retired as Jail Superintendent, Chaibasa and was holding a gun bearing No. A/1-2514 in his name under valid Arm licence bearing licence No. 1/3032. Petitioners father died in May 1990 and soon after his death petitioner deposited the gun to M/s. A.L. Shaw, Upper Bazar, Ranchi, a registered Arms dealer on 12.5.1990. Soon after the deposit of arm petitioner himself applied for the Gun licence on 16.5.1990 but the application for gun licence is still pending before respondent No. 2 Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and he did not dispose of the same. It is stated that all of a sudden petitioner received notice on 1.1.2000 from the District Arms Magistrate, Ranchi asking the petitioner to show cause as to why the arm be not confiscated by the Government. Petitioner filed his show-cause on 13.2.2000 stating inter alia that soon after the death of his father he applied for issuance of arm licence but the application for licence could not be disposed of by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi. However, the Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order and directed for confiscation of the arm. In this case also a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent stating inter alia that petitioner had informed that sub-Divisional Officer, Ranchi regarding death of his father and requested for permission to deposit the gun and thereafter Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Ranchi granted him permission to deposit the gun with M/s. A.L. Shaw and Sons, an Arms dealer. It is stated that although gun was deposited with the registered dealer but the petitioner never tiled any application before the Deputy Commissioner who is competent authority under the Arms Act, nor the petitioner took any initiation either for the transfer of the gun or for the disposal of the same. Consequently, after giving show-cause notice the impugned order was passed. 6. Consequently, after giving show-cause notice the impugned order was passed. 6. I have heard learned counsels appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the State. 7. From perusal of the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, it appears that he has exercised power under Section 21(3) of the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Deputy Commissioner was of the view that even if the petitioners applied for grant of licence/transfer of gun in their favour, they did not take any steps for the disposal of the arm within the specified time and therefore arms are liable to be forfeited. For better appreciation of the submission of the learned counsels and the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, it is worth to quote Section 21 of the said Act. Section 21 of the Arms Act reads as under :-- "Deposit of arms, etc. on possession ceasing to be lawful :--(1) Any person having in his possession any arms or ammunition the possession whereof has, in consequence of the expiration of the duration of a licence or of the suspension or revocation of a licence or by the issue of a notification under Section 4 or by any reason whatever, ceased to be lawful, shall without unnecessary delay deposit the same either with the officer-in-charge of the nearest police station or subject to such conditions as may be prescribed with a licence dealer or where such per- son is a member of the armed forces of the Union, in a unit armoury. Explanation :--(1) In this Sub-section "unit armoury" includes an armoury in a ship or establishment of the Indian Navy. Explanation :--(1) In this Sub-section "unit armoury" includes an armoury in a ship or establishment of the Indian Navy. (2) Where arms or ammunition have or has been deposited under Sub-section (1), the depositor or in the case of his death, his legal representative, shall, at any time before the expiry of such period as may be prescribed, be entitled- (a) to receive back anything so deposited on his becoming entitled by virtue of this Act or any other law for the time being in force to have the same in his possession, or (b) to dispose or unauthorise the disposal, of anything so deposited by sale or otherwise to any person entitled by virtue of this Act or any other law for the time being in force to have or not prohibited by this Act or such other law from having, the same in his possession and to receive the proceeds of any such disposal : Provided that nothing in this Sub-section shall be deemed to authorise the return or disposal of anything of which confiscation has been directed under Section 32. (3) All things deposited and not received back or disposed of under Subsection (2) within the period therein referred to shall be forfeited to Government by order of the District Magistrate : Provided that in the case of suspension of a licence no such forfeiture shall be ordered in respect of a thing covered by the licence during the period of suspension. (4) Before making an order under Sub-section (3) the District Magistrate shall, by notice in writing to he served upon the depositor or in the case of his death, upon his legal representative, in the prescribed manner, require him to show cause within thirty days from the service of the notice why the-things specified in the notice should not be forfeited. (5) After considering the cause, if any, shown by the depositor or, as the case may be, his legal representative, the District Magistrate shall pass such order as he thinks fit. (6) The Government may at any time return to the depositor or his legal representative things forfeited to it or the proceeds of disposal thereof wholly or in part. 8. (6) The Government may at any time return to the depositor or his legal representative things forfeited to it or the proceeds of disposal thereof wholly or in part. 8. From bare reading of Sub-section 2 of Section 21 it is manifest that in the event arm is deposited on account of death of the holder of the arm then his legal representative shall be entitled to take possession of the arm by virtue of the provisions of the Act. In other words, after deposit of the arm by the legal representative of the deceased if an application is made by the legal representative for grant of licence or for transfer of licence in their favour in order to take back possession of the arms then before passing order of forfeiture under Sub-section (3) of the Act, it is obligatory on the competent authority to pass order on the application filed by the legal representative for grant or transfer of licence. It is only after the competent authority refuse as to grant licence in favour of the representative necessary steps shall be taken to forfeit the arm in accordance with Sub-section (3) of the Act after giving reasonable time to the legal representative to comply the requirement of Sub- section (2) of Section 21 of the Act. 9. It is well settled that where an arm remained in deposit under Sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Act then the person who deposited it continues to be its legal owner and he can legally transfer his proprietary right in the arm to any one holding a licence. Such arm lying deposited beyond the prescribed period would not be automatically forfeited to the government. It is therefore necessary for the competent authority to consider first the case of the legal representative of the deceased holder of licence regarding his prayer for grant of licence or disposal of such arm and then take final decision forfeiture of the arm under Sub-section (3) of Section 21 of the Act, 10. For the reasons aforesaid, both the writ applications are allowed and the impugned orders passed by the competent authority under Sub-section 3 of Section 21 of the Act are quashed. For the reasons aforesaid, both the writ applications are allowed and the impugned orders passed by the competent authority under Sub-section 3 of Section 21 of the Act are quashed. The matter is remitted back to the competent authority, namely, Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to dispose of the petitioners applications for grant of licence before proceeding under Section 21(3) of the said Act in accordance with law. 11. Writ petition allowed.