JUDGMENT 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 11-7-2012 passed by the learned single Judge whereby and whereunder three writ petitions viz. OWP No. 496 of 2011 (2012 Cri. L.J. 4601 (J & K) titled M/s. Fouji Gun House vs. State and Others, and OWP No. 497 of 2011 titled M/s. Singh Gun House vs. State and Others and OWP No. 540 of 2011 titled M/s. Suresh Armoury vs. State and Others came to be determined (for short, impugned judgment). 2. Since common question of law and fact is involved in all these appeals, therefore, this judgment will govern all the three appeals. Brief Facts : 3. District Magistrate made a communication date 3-3-2011 for cancellation of licence granted in favour of writ petitioners and also made order dated 13-4-2011 in terms of which business premises of writ petitioners were searched and material arms and ammunition were seized. Feeling aggrieved, writ petitioners questioned the said orders on the grounds taken in the writ petitions. 4. During the pendency of writ petitions, writ petitioners have not pressed the relief for quashment of communication dated 3-3-2011 made by the District Magistrate to the Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, for the reasons, that the competent authority had yet to take decision on the said recommendation. Thus writ petitions survived for consideration only with regard to communication dated 13-4-2011 made by the District Magistrate, Jammu. 5. After noticing that common question of fact and law was involved, all the three writ petitions came to be decided vide impugned judgment. 6. The writ Court after examining the pleadings of the parties held that there was no material for making such orders. 7. Mr. Bastora, learned counsel for the appellants argued that licences granted in favour of writ petitioners have lost validity by the efflux of time and, more so, the same have not been renewed till today. 8. Argument of learned counsel for the appellant though attractive is devoid of force, for the reasons, that District Magistrate has made impugned order on the ground that writ petitioners were selling arms and ammunition to the persons who were holding fake and invalid licences and the guns sold were coming to the hands of anti-national elements. District Magistrate had not made the said order on the ground that the licences granted to the writ petitioners had lost validity. 9. District Magistrate had not made the said order on the ground that the licences granted to the writ petitioners had lost validity. 9. The material placed on record does not indicate that writ petitioners have sold the guns or licence of arms and ammunition in favour of persons who were not competent to purchase or who were working as anti-national elements. Thus, the writ Court has rightly made the findings and order. 10. It is for the competent authority to pass appropriate orders on the recommendation made by the District Magistrate dated 3-3-2011. 11. We have examined the pleadings of the parties and also gone through the judgment impugned minutely. In our view the same is a well reasoned and speaking one, therefore, needs no interference. 12. Having glance to the aforesaid discussions, we uphold the impugned judgment and appeals are accordingly dismissed along with connected CMA(s), if any. 13. Copy of this judgment be placed on the record of all the three appeals. Appeal dismissed.