Judgment R.M.Prasad, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners are aggrieved by the order of the licensing authority, namely, the Collector, Rohtas, contained in Annexure 2, whereby licenses of the petitioners for rifle and gun respectively have been suspended. 2. It appears that the petitioners preferred appeal against the said order before the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna, which, being barred by limitation, has also been dismissed, vide order dated 5-2-2001. Contained in Annexure-5. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in fact, there is no delay in filing of the appeal from he date when the order of the Collector was made available to them. However, as a matter of abundant caution, the petitioner filed an application for condonation of delay of seven-eight days, which has been rejected by the Commissioner without assigning any reason. He submitted that in fact, the order of the Collector itself is bad in law as the petitioners were not given any opportunity to show-cause before passing the order of suspension. 4. Earlier this matter was adjourned on the request of the learned Counsel for the State to seek instruction and file counter-affidavit, but no counter-affidavit has been filed. However, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, on instructions, has admitted that the petitioners have not given any show-cause notice before the order of suspension has been passed. 5. this Court in the case of Amar Sinha V/s. District Magistrate reported in 1990 PLJR 217, relying upon various decisions and also a Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Kapildeo Singh V/s. The State of Bihar and Ors. reported in -- , held that suspension or revocation of arms licence on any ground without affording an opportunity of being heard is bad and in violation of principles of natural justice. According to the said decision, it is mandatory on the part of the authority to give an opportunity of hearing before passing order under Sec. 17(3) of the Arms Act. 6. The writ application is, thus allowed. The impugned orders, contained in Annexures 2 and 5, are quashed. 7. However, this order shall not come in the way of the authority from passing fresn order after complying with the requirement of law.