A.Mohammed Ismail v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.No.4120 of 2025 A.MOHAMMED ISMAIL ... Petitioner Vs 1.
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KALLAKURICHI DISTRICT, KALLAKURICHI.
2.
THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER KALLAKURICHI, KALLAKURICHI DISTRICT.
3.
THE TAHSILDAR KALLAKURICHI TALUK, KALLAKURICHI DISTRICT.
4.
RAHAMATHUNNISA ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records relating to the order made in Na.Ka. G1/1691/2024 dated 26.09.2024 on the file of the first respondent confirming the order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.G1/1691/2024 dated 05.03.2024 and quash the same and consequently cancel the second legal heir ship certificate bearing No. TN Page No.1/5
7202212292211 dated 30.12.2022 by affirming the first legal heir ship certificate bearing No. TN 7202008132279 dated 21.08.2020. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Munusamy For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Government Pleader for Dr.S.Suriya Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the order made in Na.Ka. G1/ 1691/ 2024 dated 26.09.2024, whereby the first respondent confirmed the order passed by the second respondent in Na.ka. G1/ 1691 / 2024 dated 05.03.2024 and consequently cancel the second legal heir ship certificate bearing No. TN 7202212292211 dated 30.12.2022 by affirming the first legal heir ship certificate bearing No. TN 7202008132279 dated 21.08.2020.
2. The factual background in which this writ petition arises is that upon the demise of the petitioner's father, the petitioner obtained a legal heirship certificate in which the name of the fourth respondent was not included. Thereafter, the fourth respondent approached the respondents authorities by representing herself as the second wife of the petitioner's father. The Page No.2/5
authorities, therefore, included her name and issued the second legal heirship certificate dated 30.12.2022.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that when the same was done, the petitioner was never heard. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent is not the wife of late Adamsha. Therefore, the petitioner filed an appeal to cancel the said order. The authorities have affirmed the legal heirship certificate and hence the writ petition.
4. The core contention in the writ petition is that the fourth respondent is not the second wife. This Court under Article 226, cannot decide the same. The parties have to let in evidence and establish about the said status. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil forum with an appropriate prayer to declare that the fourth respondent is not the legal wife of the said Adamsha and leaving it open for the fourth respondent to defend the suit, this writ petition is disposed of, as neither this Court nor the respondents No.1 to 3 are the competent authorities to decide the marital status of the parties when there is a dispute. Page No.3/5
5. Needless to mention, the Registry shall also return the original orders to the petitioner so as to enable him to file a civil suit. The further mutation of revenue records, if any, shall be awaited by a period of three weeks from today so as to enable the petitioner to approach the appropriate Civil Court. Ultimately, it will be depended upon the interim order, if any, passed by the Civil Court.
6. With the above observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 05.02.2025 Yes/No nsl To 1.
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KALLAKURICHI DISTRICT, KALLAKURICHI.
2.
THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER KALLAKURICHI, KALLAKURICHI DISTRICT.
3.
THE TAHSILDAR KALLAKURICHI TALUK, KALLAKURICHI DISTRICT.
Page No.4/5
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl 05.02.2025 Page No.5/5