Allowed¶38

Padma v. the Commissioner of Revenue Administration

Madras HC19 Jun 2025WP/21759/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025; N. Anand Venkatesh J.; Article 226; certiorarified mandamus; legal heirship certificate; Thasildhar Bhavani Taluk; online rejection order 13.10.2024; application TN 720241013193; Nepal address in death certificate; Aadhar card Kavandapadi Erode District; Ramesh died 06.02.2023; FIR Crime No.25/2023 Kavandapadi Police Station; M.C.O.P.No.136 of 2023; rejection unsustainable; order quashed; fresh application with charges; certificate within four weeks; allowed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed: impugned online rejection order of the fourth respondent dated 13.10.2024 quashed; petitioner to make a fresh application with all necessary particulars and necessary charges; fourth respondent to issue the legal heirship certificate within four weeks of receipt. No costs.

Padma Vs the Commissioner of Revenue Administration — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the online rejection by the fourth respondent of the petitioner's application for a legal heirship certificate, on the ground that the permanent address of the deceased was found to be in Nepal, is sustainable. +1 more

¶29

Court's answer

The circumstance that the death certificate, apart from mentioning the address of the deceased at Kavandapadi, Erode, also contains a Nepal address, cannot by itself be a ground to reject the legal heirship certificate application, when all the other documents (including the Aadhar Card standing in the name of the deceased with particulars of the Kavandapadi, Erode District address) clearly show that the deceased was living in India and died in 2023 leaving behind the petitioner, two children and his mother.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

In view of the foregoing, the online rejection order of the fourth respondent is unsustainable.

¶31

Key takeaways

The impugned online rejection order of the fourth respondent dated 13.10.2024 is quashed, and the petitioner is directed to make a fresh application before the fourth respondent along with all necessary particulars by paying necessary charges.ratio¶37
On receipt of the fresh application with all necessary particulars and necessary charges, the fourth respondent shall issue the legal heirship certificate to the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (N. Anand Venkatesh, J.), Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025, decided 19.06.2025 - Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of certiorarified mandamus. Padma, widow of Late Ramesh (who died on 06.02.2023 in a road accident, FIR Crime No.25/2023, Kavandapadi Police Station, Erode District; M.C.O.P.No.136 of 2023 pending before the III Additional District Court, Gobichettipalayam), challenged the online rejection order of the Thasildhar, Bhavani Taluk (fourth respondent) dated 13.10.2024 rejecting her application (TN 720241013193) for a legal heirship certificate on the ground that the permanent address of the deceased was found to be in Nepal. The Court held that the Aadhar Card stands in the name of the deceased with particulars of the address at Kavandapadi, Erode District, and although the death certificate also carries a Nepal address, that by itself cannot be a ground to reject the legal heirship certificate when all other documents clearly show the deceased was living in India and died in 2023 leaving behind the petitioner, two children and his mother; the online rejection order is unsustainable. The impugned online rejection order dated 13.10.2024 was quashed; the petitioner was directed to make a fresh application with all necessary particulars and necessary charges, and the fourth respondent to issue the legal heirship certificate within four weeks of receipt. Petition allowed with the above direction; no costs.

¶1

Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 19.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025

¶7

Padma W/o.Late Ramesh

¶8

Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

¶11

2.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Erode.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Gobichettipalayam.

¶13

4.The Thasildhar, Bhavani Taluk Office, Bhavani, Erode District.

¶14

Respondents

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the fourth respondent in application dated 13.10.2024 TN 720241013193 and to quash the order dated 20.10.2024 and to direct the fourth respondent to issue legal heirship certificate of deceased Ramesh to the petitioner within a time as stipulated by this Court.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Saravanakumar For Respondents : Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.T.M.Rajangam, Government Advocate *****

¶17

1/4

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned

¶22

online rejection order of the fourth respondent dated 13.10.2024 and for a consequential direction to the fourth respondent to issue legal heirship certificate of deceased Ramesh.

¶23

Heard Mr.M.Saravanakumar, learned counsel for petitioner

¶24

and Mr.R.Neelakandan, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.T.M.Rajangam, learned Government Advocate, appearing for respondents.

¶25

The petitioner claims to be the wife of one Ramesh. The further case of the petitioner is that her husband died on 06.02.2023 in a road accident. A First Information Report was registered in Crime No.25/2023 on the file of Kavandapadi Police Station, Erode District. The petitioner has also filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.136 of 2023 and the same is pending before the III Additional District Court, Gobichettipalayam. Out of the wedlock, the petitioner has one son and daughter and the mother of the deceased is also alive and she is also one of the legal heir. The petitioner applied for the legal heirship certificate

¶26

2/4

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025

¶29

before the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent, through the online rejection order, has rejected the application on the ground that the permanent address of the deceased is found to be in Nepal and therefore, refused to entertain the application. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶30

On carefully considering the materials placed before this

¶31

Court, it is seen that the Aadhar Card stands in the name of the deceased and the particulars mentioned therein pertains to the address at Kavandapadi, Erode District. That apart, the death certificate of the deceased is also available. However, in the death certificate, apart from mentioning the address of the deceased at Kavandapadi, Erode, the address at Nepal also finds place. This by itself cannot be a ground to reject the legal heirship certificate when all the other documents clearly show that the deceased was living in India and he died in the year 2023 leaving behind the petitioner, two children and his mother. In view of the same, the online rejection order is unsustainable.

¶32

In view of the above discussion, the impugned online rejection order of the fourth respondent dated 13.10.2024 is hereby

¶33

3/4

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025

¶36

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J

¶37

gm quashed. The petitioner is directed to make a fresh application before the fourth respondent along with all necessary particulars by paying necessary charges and on receipt of the same, the fourth respondent shall issue the legal heirship certificate to the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks thereof.

¶38

This writ petition is allowed with the above direction. No costs.

¶39

19.06.2025

¶40

Neutral Citation: Yes/No Index: Yes/no Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order gm To 1. The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. 2.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Erode. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Gobichettipalayam. 4.The Thasildhar, Bhavani Taluk Office, Bhavani, Erode District. Writ Petition No.21759 of 2025

¶41

4/4

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Padma v. the Commissioner of Revenue Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padma v. the Commissioner of Revenue Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Tamil nadu Vs L.S.Churchil Chinnaiah

A. Mohammed Appas, Vs L.S.Churchil Chinnaiah

Jasmine Kulanthai Therese M Vs the Director of Public and Preventive Medicine and Chief Regsitrar of Births and Deaths

Udayam Explosives Vs the Insurance Regulatory and Developmetn Authority of India

K.Nallathambi Vs District Collector

Chaitanya Residential Welfare Association Vs the State Rep by