S.Rukmani v. The Tahsildar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 11.03.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH S.Rukmani ... Petitioner vs 1.The Tahsildar, Pallavaram Tahsildar Office, Pallavaram.
2. The Inspector of Police, B-4, High Court Police Station, High Court, Chennai - 600 104.
.... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and reminder letter dated 08.01.2024 and 20.01.2024 respectively, for giving explanation to the 2nd respondent with regard to the legal status in issuing separate Legal Heirship Certificate of Tmt.Padmavathy and to prove the genuineness of the Legal Heirship Certificate issued on 27.06.2022, within the time frame.
For Petitioner : Dr.G.Krishnamurthy for Mr.S.V.S.Ilamvazhuthi 1 / 4
For Respondents : Mr.S.John J.Raja Singh Additional Government Pleader - R1 Mr.R.Kishore Kumar Government Advocate - R2
ORDER
Mr.S.John J.Raja Singh, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for R1 and Mr.R.Kishore Kumar, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for R2. They are armed with instructions to enable final disposal of the matter, even at this juncture. Hence, by consent of both learned counsel, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal, even at the stage of admission.
2. The petitioner has sought a mandamus directing the first respondent, Tahsildar, Pallavaram/R1 to consider her representation and reminder dated 08.01.2024 and 20.01.2024 respectively in order to enable her to give an explanation to the Inspector of Police, B-4, High Court Police Station/R2 in regard to the legal status of one Padmavathy.
3. Padmavathy is stated to be the daughter-in-law of the petitioner. However, paragraph 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition refers at 5th and 6th line, to 'mother-in-law', which learned counsel for the petitioner, in the course of hearing, states is an inadvertant error as the said Padmavathy is the daughter-in-law of the petitioner.
2 / 4
4. Be that as it may, since the prayer is only for disposal of representation dated 08.01.2024 and reminder dated 20.01.2024 and Mr.Singh does not have any objection to the issuance of mandamus to that extent, let R1 hear the petitioner, either herself or through her authorised representative, considering her age, and dispose representation dated 08.01.2024 read with reminder dated 20.01.2024 in the best manner possible. Inputs, if any, from R2 may be obtained in the course of hearing.
5. Since the petitioner is a super senior citizen, aged 89 years, this exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law and all applicable Rules and Regulations and Government Orders.
6. This Writ Petition is disposed as above. No costs. 11.03.2024 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order:Yes sl To 1.The Tahsildar, Pallavaram Tahsildar Office, Pallavaram.
3 / 4
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
sl
2. The Inspector of Police, B-4, High Court Police Station, High Court, Chennai - 600 104.
11.03.2024 4 / 4