Dismissed

Kanaga Sridharan v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC2 Sept 2021WP/18249/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 seeking a Writ of Mandamus to issue a Legal Heirship Certificate for the petitioner's deceased husband. The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation, pass appropriate orders on merits after an opportunity of hearing, within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.06.2021 and pass orders on merits within eight weeks after an opportunity of hearing.

Kanaga Sridharan Vs The Tahsildar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 02.09.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P. No. 18249 of 2021

¶6

Kanaga Sridharan ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Tahsildar Guindy Taluk Office Chennai ... Respondent

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Thasildar Guindy Taluk office Chennai 600 032 to issue Legal Heirship Certificate for the petitioner's deceased husband Dr. Sridharan on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 22.06.2021

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr. G. Thyagarajan For Respondent : Mr. Stalin Abhimanyu Government Counsel

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu, learned Government counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the time of admission itself.

¶13

The present writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent to issue Legal Heirship Certificate to the petitioner's deceased husband Dr. Sridharan on the basis of her representation, dated 22.06.2021.

¶14

According to the petitioner, her husband had earlier obtained mutual consent divorce from his first wife and thereafter had legally married her. The petitioner further submits that her husband passed away on 18.04.2019 leaving behind the petitioner, her two children and two children born to her husband and his first wife. The petitioner submits that

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

earlier she had applied for a legal heirship certificate online, which was not considered by the respondent, pursuant to which she had sent a representation dated 22.06.2021 to the respondent. However till date, the respondent has not passed any order thereof, hence, this writ petition.

¶17

Heard both sides. Considering the limited relief sought for in this writ petition, this court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.06.2021 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to her, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶18

With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS VII)

¶21

//True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

dhk/rsh To

¶24

The Tahsildar, Guindy Taluk Office, Chennai.

¶25

+1cc to M/s.G.Thyagarajan, Advocate Sr.44542 +1cc to the Government pleader Sr.44592

¶26

WP No. 18249 of 2021

¶27

ajs[co] srg 12/10/2021

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Kanaga Sridharan v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanaga Sridharan v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Madhavan Vs District Collector

S.Ponnusamy Vs The District Collector

J.Rajasekaran Vs The District Collector

Mohamed John Vs The Secretary to

R.Parthiban Vs The Chief Secretary to Government

Chinnammal, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer