Allowed

M.Sathya v. The District Collector

Madras HC2 Feb 2021WP/2041/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's application for a legal heirship certificate regarding her deceased father and pass a final order on merits within twelve weeks after hearing all interested parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to consider the application on merits and pass final orders within twelve weeks.

M.Sathya Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 02.02.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶5

W.P. No.2041 of 2021

¶6

M.Sathya ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

1.The District Collector,
Kallakurichi District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Ulundurpet Taluk,
Kallakurichi. ... Respondents

¶9

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the legal heir petition directly filed by the petitioner dated 27.11.2020 in application No.TN7202011271272 and further directing the respondents to issue legal heir certificate to the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶10

For petitioner ..Mr.S.Ramajayam

¶11

For respondents..Mr.D.Suriya Narayanan, Government Advocate

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Mr.S.Ramajayam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Suriya Narayanan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

¶14

By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the time of admission itself.

¶15

This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus seeking for a direction to the respondents to dispose of the application filed by the petitioner on 27.11.2020 seeking for issuance of Legal Heirship certificate for her father Vaithyalingam, who died on 08.12.2004. The petitioner and her mother Saradha applied for Legal Heirship certificate with the respondents on 27.11.2020 through application No.TN-7202011271272. According to the petitioner, till date, the said application has not been

¶16

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

¶17

considered by the respondents. In such circumstances, this writ petition has been filed.

¶18

The relief sought for in this writ petition is an innocuous one. No prejudice will be caused, if the petitioner's application, dated 27.11.2020 seeking for issuance of Legal Heirship ceritifcate for her father Vaithyalingam, who died on 08.12.2004 is considered on merits and in accordance with law. In the Typed set of papers filed by the petitioner before this Court, the death certificate of the petitioner's father Vaithyalingam has also been produced, which will disclose that the petitioner's father died on 08.12.2004.

¶19

For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application, dated 27.11.2020 filed through application No.TN-7202011271272 seeking for issuance of Legal Heirship certificate for her deceased father Vaithyalingam, who died on 08.12.2004 and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner and the other legal heirs of the deceased Vaithyalingam, including the mother of the petitioner, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vsi2 To 1.The District Collector, Kallakurichi District. 2.The Tahsildar, Ulundurpet Taluk, Kallakurichi. W.P. No.2041 of 2021 GP(CO) RMP(26/02/2021)

¶20

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

M.Sathya v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Sathya v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Sathiyakumari Vs The Secretary to Government

A.Sundari Vs The Chief Secretary to Government

V.Balaraman Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

M.Sekar Vs Reserve Bank of India

R.Rajeswari Vs The Regional Director

S.Senbagam, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu