6.Admittedly, as seen from the impugned order dated 04.11.2020, the application for Legal Heirship certificate has been rejected only on the ground that the petitioner and four other siblings of the deceased A.Vidhyavathi are Class II Legal Heirs. Excepting for the said reason, no other reason has been given and the respondent has also not considered the claim of the petitioner that the deceased A.Vidhyavathi died as spinster leaving behind her siblings namely the petitioner as well as four others as her Legal Heirs. No opportunity of hearing was also afforded to the petitioner and other siblings of the deceased A.Vidhyavathi by the respondent. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent has violated the principles of natural justice by not affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. The impugned order is a non-speaking order and none of the contentions raised by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition has been considered . Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that on account violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned order passed by the respondent has to be necessarily quashed and the matter remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law.
