Madras High Court
S.Babu vs The Tahsildar on 26 April, 2016
Author: R.Subbiah
Bench: R.Subbiah
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 26.04.2016 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice R.SUBBIAH W.P.No.15585 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.13552 of 2016 S.Babu .... Petitioner ..vs.. 1.The Tahsildar, Guindy Circle, Chennai-600 015. ...Respondent Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent herein in his proceedings Letter No.E1/764/2014, dated 10.06.2014 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondent herein to issue the Legal Heir Certificate to the petitioner, within a time-frame. For Petitioner : M/s.G.Bala and Daisy For Respondent : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Spl. GP. * * * * * ORDER
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent in his proceedings Letter No.E1/764/2014, dated 10.06.2014 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondent herein to issue the Legal Heir Certificate to the petitioner, within a time-frame.
2.In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been averred by the petitioner that the petitioner's mother S.Dhamal had passed away on 10.04.1991 and she had three daughters and one son viz., one P.Vasantha, S.Vijaya, S.Santhi and the petitioner herein. At the time of his mother death, the petitioner was very young. The petitioner applied for Legal Heirship Certificate on 10.03.2014 to the respondent. But, the respondent without conducting a proper enquiry rejected the petitioner's application on the sole ground that the petitioner's mother had passed away 23 years ago. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition before this Court.
3.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the circular dated 28.11.1991 in Letter (Nilai) No.4534 issued by the Special Commissioner and Secretary, submitted that the said circular makes the position very clear that there is no limitation for making the application for applying the legal heir certificate. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the decision of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.16233 of 2014, dated 25.09.2014, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court, by following the order dated 25.09.2013 passed by this Court in a batch writ petitions in W.P.(MD) Nos.14956 of 2013 batch, allowed the writ petition filed by the petitioner therein for similar relief. The relevant portion in the said decision reads as follows_ 4.Identical impugned orders were subject matters before this Court in a batch of writ petition in W.P.(MD) Nos.14956 of 2013 batch. This Court, vide order dated 25.09.2013, disposed of the writ petitions with the following observations:
5. In fact, this Court in the said W.P.(MD) No. 11709 of 2009, by order dated 16.11.2009, made it further clear that there is no limitation for seeking the relief of Legal Heirship Certificate. On this basis, the 3 rejection of all the requests on the ground of limitation, was considered by this Court and hence, it is not proper on the part of the Tahsildar again to reject any application filed by the parties on the ground of delay. Besides a Circular issued by the Special Commissioner and Secretary, dated 28.11.1991, in Letter (Nilai) No.4534 also makes the position very clear that there is no limitation for making the application for getting the Legal Heirship Certificate. It is pertinent to extract herein a relevant portion of the said circular as follows:-
"3/ neuo thhpRjhuh;fSf;F thhpRr; rhd;wpjH; ntz;Lgth; ,we;Jnghdthpd; ,wg;g[r; rhd;wpjiH ,izj;J. Kj;jpiuf; fl;lztpy;iy xl;o rk;ge;jg;gl;l tl;lhrpaUf;F kD bra;a ntz;Lk;/ ,t;thW bgwg;gLk; kD rk;ge;jg;gl;l tUtha; Ma;thsUf;F chpa tprhuizf;fhf mDg;gg;glntz;Lk;/ 4/ rk;ge;jg;gl;l tUtha; Ma;th; kw;Wk; fpuhk eph;thf mYtyh; Mfpnahh; tl;lhrpah; mYtyfj;jpypUe;J kD tug; bgw;wt[ld; rk;ge;jg;gl;l kDjhuh; trpf;Fkplj;jpw;Fr; brd;W Kjypy; kDjhuiua[k; mth; jk; FLk;gj;jpy; cs;s midtiua[k;. gpd;dh; mtuJ cwtpdh;fs; mz;il tPl;lhh; kw;Wk; bghJ kf;fs; Mfpnahiua[k; ed;F tprhuiz bra;J. mth;fsplkpUe;J thf;FK:yk; bgw;Wf; bfhs;s ntz;Lk;/ FLk;g ml;il. ,we;J nghdtUf;Fr; brhe;jkhd brhj;Jf;fs; caph;. jpUkzg; gj;jphpif kw;Wk; mtuhy; tpl;Lr; bry;yg;gl;l Vida Mtz';fs; Kjyhd midj;ija[k; ed;F ghprPyid bra;J ,we;J nghdthpd; thhpRjhuh;fs; ahh; ahh; vd;gija[k; mjw;fhd tptu';fisa[k; mwpf;ifahfj; bjhFj;J tl;lhl;rpaUf;F mDg;gntz;Lk;/ 5/ tUtha; Ma;thshpd; mwpf;if fpilf;fg; bgw;wt[ld; tl;lhl;rpah; mjid ed;F ghprPyid bra;antz;Lk;/ ghprPyidf;Fg; gpd; ,we;Jnghdthpd; thhpRjhuh;fs; ahh;. ahh; vd;gij jPh;f;fkhf cWjp bra;a ntz;Lk;/ re;njfg;gLk; ,d';fspy;. rk;ge;jg;gl;l kDjhuiunah my;yJ mtuJ FLk;gj;jpdh;/cwtpdh; my;yJ mt;t{iur; nrh;e;j bghJ kf;fs; vtiunaDk;. my;yJ ntW Mtz';fs; vijnaDk; nfl;Lg; bgw;nwh. tl;lhrpah; Kot[ bra;ayhk;.
6/ ,we;Jnghd eghpd; thhpRjhuh;fs; ahh; ahh; vd;gij re;njfj;jpw;fplkpd;wp Kot[ bra;j gpd; fPH;fhZk; gotj;jpy; thhpRr; rhd;wpjH; tH';fg;gl ntz;Lk;/ A mere reading of the above circular issued by the Special Commissioner and Secretary to Government mandates every Tahsildar to issue to the Legal Heirship Certificate after obtaining proper report from the Subordinate Officers. Therefore, when the issue for issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate has been clearly settled by this Court saying that there is no limitation for making application for obtaining Legal Heirship Certificate, the concerned Tahsildar cannot shirk their responsibilities by simply directing the parties to approach the Court.
6. Mr.K.Chellapandian, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the District Revenue Officers of Madurai, Dindigul, Virudhunagar and Sivagangai, after taking instructions from them made a statement before this Court that hereinafter the District Revenue Officers would give written instructions to all the Tahsildars and also other Revenue Officers, viz., the Revenue Inspectors and Village Administrative Officers, to dispose of the applications seeking issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate, within a maximum time of four weeks, but in deserving cases, the Officers would be directed to issue the same at the earliest possible time, preferably within a week. Also, he further submitted that all the petitioners, who have come to this Court challenging the correctness of the impugned proceedings issued by the various Tahsildars, may be asked to make a fresh application to the Tahsildar concerned along with the necessary documents, viz., Death Certificate, Xerox copy of the Ration Card or Voters Identity Card, attested by Notary Public for expeditious issuance of the Legal Heirship Certificate.
7. Accepting the said statement made by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents, the petitioners are directed to make a fresh application within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, along with necessary documents mentioned above and on receiving such applications from the petitioners, the concerned Tahsildar, without looking into the limitation, shall take all reasonable efforts to issue Legal Heirship Certificates to the concerned parties at the earliest possible time as per the Letter (Nilai) No.4534, dated 28.11.1991, not exceeding in any event more than four weeks thereafter and the District Revenue Officers concerned are also hereby directed to issue suitable written instructions to all the Tahsildars. On receipt of this order, the learned Additional Advocate General is directed to forward a copy of this order to all the District Revenue Officers to follow the directions issued by this Court regarding issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate.
5.In the light of the above direction, the concerned Tahsildars has to take note of the circular issued, which has not been taken into consideration in the instant case.
6.Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the second respondent for fresh consideration by complying with the direction issued in the earlier writ petition as referred to supra. The said action shall be taken by the second respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
5.Following the above said decision of this Court, I am of the opinion that an appropriate direction could be given to the respondent in this writ petition.
6.Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, with a direction to the respondent to conduct fresh enquiry and to pass appropriate orders, in the light of the Circular dated 28.11.1991 and the directions issued by this Court in the earlier batch of writ petitions referred to above, within a period of eight weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, the writ petition is ordered. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
26.04.2016 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No ssv To
1.The District Collector, Collectorate of Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.
2.The Tashildar, Ambattur Taluk Office, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.
R.SUBBIAH, J., ssv W.P.No.15585 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.13552 of 2016 26.04.2016