Disposed¶36

S.Sivasujatha v. The Government of Tamil nadu

Madras HC2 Mar 2026WP/7280/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Legal heir certificate; mandamus; Article 226; W.P.No.7280 of 2026; Madras High Court; M. Dhandapani J.; Tahsildar Ayanavaram Taluk Office; District Collector Chennai; application dated 13.01.2026; Class I legal heir; competing claim by third respondent as daughter of second wife; enquiry direction; G.O.(Ms).No.478 Revenue and Disaster Management Department dated 29.09.2022; six weeks timeline; notice dispensed with; disposed without costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent (Tahsildar, Ayanavaram Taluk Office) to conduct an enquiry between the petitioner's family and the third respondent on the petitioner's application dated 13.01.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with G.O.(Ms).No.478, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 29.09.2022, within six weeks; no order as to costs.

S.Sivasujatha Vs The Government of Tamil nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the respondents to act on the petitioner's application dated 13.01.2026 for a legal heir certificate, she claiming to be a Class I legal heir of the deceased S.Sivaraj, in the face of the third respondent's competing claim.

¶21

Court's answer

Without going into the merits of the case, the Court directed the second respondent to conduct an enquiry between the petitioner's family and the third respondent on the basis of the petitioner's application dated 13.01.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with G.O.(Ms).No.478, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 29.09.2022, within six weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

The direction was issued on the limited request of the petitioner's counsel, expressly without deciding the merits of the rival claims to heirship.

¶32

Key takeaways

Notice to the third respondent was dispensed with because no adverse order was going to be passed against her.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Dhandapani, J.), W.P.No.7280 of 2026, decided 02-03-2026: Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus to the District Collector and the Tahsildar, Ayanavaram Taluk Office to issue a legal heir certificate on the petitioner's application dated 13.01.2026, she claiming to be a Class I legal heir of late S.Sivaraj, a railway employee who died during Covid-19; the Tahsildar had denied the mother's application and not acted on the petitioner's application owing to a competing claim by the third respondent (Jayalakshmi) that she is the daughter of the deceased's second wife. Taken up for final disposal by consent, the Court, without going into the merits and dispensing with notice to the third respondent since no adverse order was contemplated, directed the second respondent to conduct an enquiry between the petitioner's family and the third respondent on the basis of the application dated 13.01.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with G.O.(Ms).No.478, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 29.09.2022, within six weeks. Petition disposed of, no order as to costs.

¶1

W.P.No.7280 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.7280 of 2026

S.Sivasujatha

..Petitioner

1.The District Collector, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Ayanavaram Taluk Office, No.18/31, Palli Arasan Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 102.

¶12

3.Jayalakshmi

¶13

..Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to issue the legal heir certificate as per the application made by the petitioner on 13.01.2026 being the Class I Legal heir within the time that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶15

For Petitioner(s): M/s.T.P.Savitha For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Rajendiran, Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R2.

¶16

Page1 of 5

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.7280 of 2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶21

This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus directing the respondents to issue the legal heir certificate as per the application made by the petitioner on 13.01.2026 being the Class I Legal heir within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶22

The petitioner, her brother and sisters are the legitimate children of late S.Sivaraj, who was a railway employee. The petitioner’s mother being illiterate and innocent, taking advantage of the same, the petitioner’s father began living with another woman and in order to safeguard his service, obtained an ex-parte divorce against the petitioner’s mother. During Covid-19, the petitioner’s father passed away at the age of 81 and when the petitioner’s mother applied for Legal Heir Certificate, the same was illegally denied by the 2^nd respondent. Since the matter has been kept pending by the respondents for a considerable period of time, without granting any relief, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court seeking appropriate relief.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is one of the legal heirs of the deceased Sivaraj, whereas, a stale claim was made by the third respondent that she is the daughter of the second wife of

¶24

Page2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.7280 of 2026

¶27

the deceased Sivaraj and thereby, the second respondent has not taken any action on the application made by the petitioner dated 13.01.2026. Hence, this Court may issue a direction to the second respondent to conduct enquiry on the

¶28

basis of the application made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.

¶29

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.

¶30

Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the third respondent, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.

¶31

In view of the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing

¶32

for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the second respondent to conduct enquiry between the petitioner’s family and the third respondent on the basis of the application made by the petitioner dated 13.01.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with G.O.(Ms).No.478, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 29.09.2022 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

__________ Page3 of 5

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.7280 of 2026

¶36