Sekar v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.(MD)No.10128 of 2023 Sekar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, O/o. District Collector, Thenkasi District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankarankovil, Thenkasi District.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Sankarankovil, Thenkasi Dist

4. The District Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Service, ICDS Office, Collector Office Campus, Tenkasi District.

5. The Child Development Project Officer, O/o. Child Development Office, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

6. Maheswari

7. Murugesan ... Respondents 1/6

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to consider the petitioner's representation on 08.12.2022 for fraudulent deserted women certificate obtained by the sixth respondent in the third respondent office, vide R.Dis.25457/19.07.2016, within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ponraj For R-1 to R-5 : Mr.C.Satheesh, Government Advocate For R-6 : Mr.S.Kumar

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 5 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2022 regarding the fraudulent obtaining of a deserted woman certificate by the sixth respondent from the office of the third respondent, vide proceedings in R.Dis.No.25457/19.07.2016, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. According to the petitioner, he is the husband of the sixth respondent. The petitioner filed divorce petitions before the Sub Court, Sankarankovil, however, the same were dismissed. Thereafter, the 2/6

petitioner executed a settlement deed in favour of the sixth respondent. Suppressing all these material facts, the sixth respondent allegedly obtained a deserted woman certificate from the third respondent and subsequently, secured employment as a Cook in an Anganwadi at Karivalamnanthanallur. The grievance of the petitioner is that the sixth respondent has fraudulently obtained the deserted woman certificate.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent would submit that the deserted woman certificate was issued in the year 2016, whereas the settlement deed was executed by the petitioner in favour of the sixth respondent only in the year 2017.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 would submit that the marriage between the petitioner and the sixth respondent was solemnized in the year 2000 and that the deserted woman certificate was issued to the sixth respondent only after due and proper verification of records. It is further submitted that issuance of a deserted woman certificate does not necessarily depend upon the grant of divorce. Since the petitioner is not taking care of the sixth respondent and the child, the certificate was rightly issued. 3/6

6. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. It is seen that the deserted woman certificate was issued in favour of the sixth respondent in the year 2016 after due verification by the competent authority. The settlement deed relied upon by the petitioner was admittedly executed only in the year 2017, subsequent to the issuance of the certificate. Further, it is not in dispute that no decree of divorce has been granted in favour of the petitioner and that the marital relationship between the petitioner and the sixth respondent continues to subsist.

8. This Court is of the considered view that issuance of a deserted woman certificate does not necessarily depend upon the grant of divorce, and the same can be issued if the woman is otherwise found to be deserted and not maintained by her husband. In the present case, there are no materials to establish that the certificate was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.

4/6

9. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

10. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

04.12.2025 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No TSG To

1. The District Collector, O/o. District Collector, Thenkasi District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankarankovil, Thenkasi District.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Sankarankovil, Thenkasi Dist

4. The District Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Service, ICDS Office, Collector Office Campus, Tenkasi District.

5. The Child Development Project Officer, O/o. Child Development Office, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

5/6

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

TSG W.P.(MD)No.10128 of 2023 04.12.2025 6/6