Selvaraj Vs The District collector

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records relating to the order in application Number TN-7202510071178 dated 07.10.2025 of 4th respondent and quash the same and direct fourth respondent to issue legal heirship certificate to petitioner, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

For Petitioner(s):	Mr.C.Veeraraghavan
For Respondent(s):	Mr.P.Elayaraj Kumar Government
	for R1 to R4

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings dated 07.10.2025, whereby petitioner’s application for issuance of

¶24

legal heirship certificate as legal heir of Karuppan @ Ganamuthu was rejected.

¶25

The challenge is primarily on the premise that no enquiry was made on the application taken out by petitioner.

¶26

Petitioner would submit that his father Karuppan @ Ganamuthu died on 27.05.1995 due to old age. He would submit that legal heirship certificate was issued by fourth respondent vide proceedings dated 26.02.2021 to petitioner

¶27

and the following legal heirs:

¶28

i) Kanagaraj

¶29

Page2 of 6

¶30

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

¶31

WP No. 24542 of 2026

¶32

ii) Manickam iii) Durairaj iv) Dhanaraj v) Selvaraj vi) Amsaveni vii) Yesammal viii)Mariammal ix) Kaliammal @ Kanagamani

¶33

Sixth respondent preferred an appeal before third respondent, seeking cancellation of legal heirship certificate dated 26.02.2021 issued by fourth respondent. Third respondent, vide order proceedings dated 01.04.2025, cancelled the said legal heirship certificate. Aggrieved by the said order of third respondent, petitioner’s brother viz., Durairaj preferred a revision before second respondent and the same was disposed of vide proceedings dated 16.09.2025, directing legal heirs of Karuppan @ Ganamuthu to apply afresh before fourth respondent seeking legal heirship certificate. Pursuant thereto, petitioner applied for legal heirship certificate before fourth respondent on 07.10.2025, however, the same was rejected on the premise that there is a mismatch in the name of petitioner’s father inasmuch as documents filed in support of issuance of legal heirship certificate discloses petitioner’s father’s name as Ganamuthu instead of Karuppan and objection have also been raised. Petitioner would submit that rejection order has been passed without any enquiry and would thus submit that the impugned order suffers from gross violation of principles of natural justice.

¶34

__________ Page3 of 6

¶35

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

¶36

WP No. 24542 of 2026

¶37

Learned State Counsel for respondents 1 to 4 would submit that they would consider petitioner’s representation dated 07.10.2025 and pass orders afresh, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, which was agreed to by learned counsel for petitioner.

¶38

6. In view thereof, the impugned order dated 07.10.2025 is set aside. Fourth respondent is directed to consider petitioner’s application dated 07.10.2025 afresh on its own merits and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to petitioner, sixth respondent and any other interested party, within a period of six weeks from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for the receipt of certified copy . It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the

¶39

merits of the case.

¶40

7. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as

¶41

to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶42

30-06-2026

¶43

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

¶44

__________ Page4 of 6