V.Ponnuchamy v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.06.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD) No.12394 of 2018 V.Ponnuchamy ... Petitioner vs.

1. The District Collector Virudhunagar District Virudhunagar

2. The Tahsildar (Revenue) Kariyapatti Taluk Virudhunagar District

3. The Village Administrative Officer Mustakurichi Kariyapatti Taluk Virudhunagar District ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to take appropriate action to change the name of petitioner's father who was died on 28.10.2006 as V.Vaikunda Velar S/o.Vaikunda Velar instead of P.Vaikunda Velar S/o.Ponnuchamy Velar in his death certificate dated 01.11.2006 based on the representation made by the petitioner on 28.02.2018. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Vijayrajan For Respondents : Mr.S.Nagarajan Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2

O R D E R

Mr.S.Nagarajan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Notice to the third respondent is dispensed with in view of nature of the order to be passed by this Court.

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 3.

It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation dated 28.02.2018 seeking to change his father's name, who died on 28.10.2006, as V.Vaikunda Velar S/o.Vaikunda Velar instead of P.Vaikunda Velar S/o. Ponnuchamy Velar, in his death certificate dated 01.11.2006, has not been considered by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

official respondents till date and therefore, he has filed the present writ petition.

4. This Court has not expressed any of its view with regard to the merits of the representation made by the petitioner. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made, the official respondents are duty bound to consider the same in one way or the other. Non-consideration of the same would amount to dereliction of ordinary duties of their office and as such, this Court would be justified in invoking its powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct them to consider the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time.

5. In view of the limited prayer sought for in this writ petition, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.02.2018 on its own merits and take further action in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To:

1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2. The Tahsildar (Revenue), Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

+1cc to Mr.N.Vijayrajan, Advocate Sr.No.68092 Krk MK/SV MMS/SAR 3/21.06.2018/2P/4C W.P.(MD) No.12394 of 2018 12.06.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/