Dismissed

R.Gowri v. The Zonal Assistant Health Officer

Madras HC7 Jun 2022WP/4653/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought cancellation of an Aadhar card issued to her deceased son in the name of an estranged individual. The High Court held that identity, marriage, and conversion are questions of fact requiring civil evidence, not suitable for writ jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed with questions left open for a civil court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; all questions left open to bedecided by a competent Civil Court.

R.Gowri Vs The Zonal Assistant Health… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 07.06.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶5

WP.NO.4653 OF 2019 & WMP.NO.5271 OF 2019

R.Gowri

... Petitioner

The Zonal Assistant Health Officer Zonal-IX, Corporation of Chennai No.1, 4^th Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.

¶10

The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Buildings Park Town, Chennai 600 003.

¶11

The Deputy Director General UIDAI Regional Office, Bengaluru Khanija Bhavan, No.49, 3^rd Floor South Wing Race Course Road Bengaluru 560 001.

¶12

The Chairman Unique Identification Authority of India Government of India [GOI] Bangla Sahib Road Behind Kali Mandir, Gole Market New Delhi 110 001. 5. The Medical Director CSI Kalyani Multi Speciality Hospital No.15, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.

¶13

Mrs.Sultana

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

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

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus against the 3^rd respondent reply letter dated 20.12.2018 vide Ref.No.F.No.L-11014/282/2017-2018/7197 pertaining to AADHAAR CARD No.2383 1148 6552 in the name of Mohammed Iqbal S/o.Rafiq residing at No.4-1, Jawahar Hussain Khan 6^th Street, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014, and quash the said reply vide Ref.No.F.NoL11014/282/2017-2018/7197 letter dated 20.12.2018 issued without any proper proof and identity and consequently pass an order/direction against the 1^st and 2^nd respondent to record the death of R.Boominathan, S/o.Late Rajangan and Mrs.R.Gowri, aged 43 years who died on 26.11.2018 at 5^th respondent hospital after obtaining proper representation from the petitioner through the 5^th respondent to register the name in the death register maintained by the 1^st and 2^nd respondents.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sundar

¶18

For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.R.Gopinath Standing Counsel

¶19

For R5 : Mr.R.Nixon For R6 : Mr.Abdul Ravoof For RR 3 & 4 : No appearance

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(1) The petitioner seeks cancellation of the Aadhar Card issued to one Mohammed Iqbal, S/o.Rafiq residing at No.41, Jawahar Hussain Khan 6th Street, Royapettah, Chennai14, bearing No.2383 1148 6552.

¶22

(2) The authority has rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that an Aadhar Card cannot be cancelled at the request of a third party. The petitioner claims to be the mother of the deceased Mohammed Iqbal. According to the petitioner, the deceased Mohammed Iqbal is her son and his name was Boominathan. He was in a live-in relationship with the 6th respondent and the 6th respondent had used the identity of her estranged husband to obtain an Aadhar Card for the petitioner's son.

¶23

(3) The 6th respondent has filed a counter along with a typed set of papers which would go to show that the deceased son of the petitioner had converted to Islam in the year 2000

¶24

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

¶25

and had married the 6th respondent. The couple are also blessed with a son named Mohammed Ibrahim whose School Certificates have also been produced. While the petitioner claims that her son was a in live-in relationship with the 6th respondent, the 6th respondent claims that he had converted to Islam and married her.

¶26

(4) These are questions of fact which cannot be decided in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The challenge in the writ petition is to a very innocuous order rejecting the request of the petitioner to cancel the Aadhar Card. Identity of a person, marital relationship, conversion etc., are all questions of fact which will have to be decided based on evidence.

¶27

(5) I therefore, do not see any ground to invoke the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶28

(6) Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. All questions are left open to be decided by a competent Civil Court in a properly instituted civil proceeding. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶31

//True Copy//

¶32

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶33

¶34

¶35

The Zonal Assistant Health Officer Zonal-IX, Corporation of Chennai No.1, 4^th Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.

¶36

The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Buildings Park Town, Chennai 600 003.

¶37

The Deputy Director General UIDAI Regional Office, Bengaluru Khanija Bhavan, No.49, 3^rd Floor South Wing Race Course Road Bengaluru 560 001.

¶38

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

¶39

The Chairman

¶40

Unique Identification Authority of India Government of India [GOI] Bangla Sahib Road Behind Kali Mandir, Gole Market New Delhi 110 001.

¶41

The Medical Director CSI Kalyani Multi Speciality Hospital No.15, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.

¶42

+2ccs to Mr.S.Aswin Karthikeyan, Advocate, S.R.No.32868

¶43

+1cc to Mr.R.Gopinath, Advocate, S.R.No.32389

¶44

+1cc to Mr.Abdul Ravoof, Advocate, S.R.No.33514

¶45

WP.No.4653 of 2019

¶46

SKM(CO) RLP(14/06/2022)

¶47

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

R.Gowri v. The Zonal Assistant Health Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Gowri v. The Zonal Assistant Health Officer

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

J.Vijaysundar Vs Kakarla Usha.I.a.S.

J.Vijaysundar Vs Pradeep Yadav IAS

Priyanka Vs Neethi

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs Sunriv Pharmaccuticals Pvt. Ltd.

V.G.Selvaraj Vs The Lok Adalat Authority

Mr. Jayaramprasad Vs The Chief General Manager