M. Meena, Vs The District Collector

Petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing Respondents 1 and 2 to consider petitioner representation dated 21.02.2026 and pass

¶19

For Petitioner(s): M/S.M.VIGNESH

¶20

Page1 of 6

¶21

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

¶22

WP No. 12861 of 2026

¶23

For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Murthi, GA RR1 to 4

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider petitioner representation dated 21.02.2026

¶26

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the own sister and only surviving legal heir of Late Ravi. The petitioner's father Late Munuswamy died long back and her mother Late Aparanji died on 24.01.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner's brother late Ravi died on 11.02.2026 as an unmarried person without leaving behind any legally wedded wife or children. During his lifetime, the deceased Ravi executed a registered Will dated 27.06.2022 before the Sub Registrar, Uthangarai wherein he had categorically declared that he had not married and that no third party would have any claim over his properties. While so, the respondents 5 to 7 have falsely come forward claiming that the 5^th respondent is the wife of the deceased and respondents 6 and 7 are his daughters. The 5^th respondent was already married to one Manickam and the said marriage has not been dissolved in accordance with law. In these circumstances, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation on 21.02.2026 to the official respondents requesting not to issue any legal heir certificate in

¶27

Page2 of 6

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 12861 of 2026

¶30

favour of the respondents 5 to 7 and to conduct proper enquiry. However, no action has been taken so far, hence, the present writ petition.

¶31

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this court may issue a direction to the respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

¶32

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that as on date, the legal heir certificate has not been issued in favour of the private respondents. If the private respondents makes any application, it will be considered in accordance with law. The petitioner claims that the respondents 5 to 7 are not legal heirs of the deceased Ravi and for getting appropriate remedy, she has to approach the competent civil Court and not before the revenue officials.

¶33

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. Since

¶34

no adverse order is passed against the private respondents, notice to them are dispensed with.

¶35

__________ Page3 of 6

¶36

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

¶37

WP No. 12861 of 2026

¶38

On perusal of the affidavit, it is made clear that the claim made by the petitioner is disputed question of facts, which cannot be decided by this Court under Writ jurisdiction as well as the revenue officials and the same has to be decided only by the competent civil forum.

¶39

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without rendering any opinion on the merits of the case, permits the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court for appropriate remedy.

¶40

In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. However, liberty is granted to the 4^th respondent that if the private respondents makes any application for legalheir ship certificate, he may be pass orders after providing opportunity to the petitioner as well as the private respondents in terms of G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 13.03.2024.

¶41

07-04-2026

¶42

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶43

RLI

¶44

__________ Page4 of 6

¶45

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

¶46

WP No. 12861 of 2026