Jayamugilan Vs the District Collector

PRAYER: The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus d irecting the 1st respondent to take action against the 5th to 9th respondents for creating fake legal heir certificates rd bearing Pa.Mu. 7653 / 2003 / A3 dated 5.6.2004 and also direct the 3 Respondent to not entertain patta transfer in the survey numbers 104/4, 104/5, 107/7, 216/5, 217/2, 268/1, 251/4 at Mathur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluka Since these survey numbers by considering 1st petitioner's representation dated 16.07.2024 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court

¶30

For Petitioner(s): Prabhu C. For Respondent: Mr.G.Velu, AGP for R1 to R4

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to take action against the respondents 5 to 9 for creating a forged and fabricated legal heirship certificate dated 05.06.2004 and to take action against them in accordance with law.

¶33

Heard Mr.C.PRabhu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.Velu, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 4.

¶34

The specific case of the petitioner is that the legal heirship certificate after the demise of Shankaran was issued by adding the name of the 6th respondent, the 2nd petitioner and the name of the predeceased son Raghavan. However, it is alleged that the 6th respondent managed to create a fabricated and

¶35

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

¶36

WP No. 28733 of 2025

¶37

forged document by merely mentioning her name and the name of the deceased son Raghavan as a legal heirs with the help of the 5th respondent. Thereafter, the property was alienated in favour of respondents 7 to 9. Under such circumstances, the 1st petitioner, who is the agent of the 2nd petitioner had given a complaint to the 1st respondent and also to the 4th respondent. Since no further action was taken, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

¶38

The specific stand taken by the petitioners is that the legal heirship certificate dated 05.06.2004 is a forged and fabricated document and based on the same, the property was alienated. This issue can be enquired by the 3rd respondent, who is the authority, who issues the legal heirship certificate and it does not require a District collector to conduct an enquiry.

¶39

In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the 2nd petitioner to submit a fresh representation before the 3rd respondent along with all the relevant documents and also a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the 3rd respondent shall call all the interested parties and conduct an enquiry and take a decision within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the fresh representation from the petitioner. If ultimately, it is ascertained that the legal heirship certificate dated 05.06.2004 is a forged and fabricated document, the 3rd respondent shall proceed further in accordance with law.

¶40

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

¶41

WP No. 28733 of 2025

¶42