Subburaj, S/O.Krishnasamy, v. the Tahsildar
Case brief
What is this about?
This writ petition challenged an order rejecting a request for a legal heirship certificate. The High Court held that despite the petitioner being a Class-II heir, the Tahsildar is directed to issue the certificate or conduct an enquiry, as the petitioner was excluded only because there were no Class-I heirs and no other inhibitors listed in government guidelines existed. The appeal was disposed o
What did the court decide?
Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application and pass orders after conducting an enquiry and verifying the fact whether any other legal heirs are available for the deceased, wi
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.10.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
W.P.(MD)No.18215 of 2016
Subburaj
... Petitioner
Vs.
The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai.
... Respondent
Prayer : Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.2065/16/A3 dated 15.04.2016 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent to issue legal heirship certificate to the petitioner forthwith
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Anandkumar For Respondent : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss G.A.,
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tahsildar can be directed to issue a legal heirship certificate to Class-II heirs when there are no Class-I heirs?
Whether the injunction in Government Letter Rt No.1534 applies only to the four specific categories of cases where legal heirship certificates should not be issued?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Subburaj
- respondent
The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai
Coram
V. BHARATHIDASAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court