IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.6342 of 2005 Between: Smt. Korukonda Hymavathamma. … Petitioner And The Mandal Revenue Officer, Rompicherla Mandal, Rompicherla, Guntur District and two others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P.Ramabrahmam. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Revenue. This Court made the following: ORDER:- At the interlocutory stage the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in not conducting enquiry on representation dated 10-10-2004 filed by the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri P.Ramabrahmam, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. The petitioner alleged that her father expired on 31-5-1997 leaving behind him the petitioner as the only successor in interest and that her mother also died. The petitioner claimed to have approached respondent No.1 with application dated 10-10-2004 for issue of a legal heir certificate in her favour in order to receive certain amounts payable to her on the death of her father. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 has not disposed of the said application by issuing the legal heir certificate. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, stated that the enquiry conducted by respondent No.1 revealed that the claim of the petitioner that she is the only legal heir of her deceased father was not correct and that the deceased-Sri Korukonda Sadasiva Sastry left behind him some other legal heirs, in addition to the petitioner. Even assuming that the petitioner’s claim, that she is the sole surviving legal heir of her deceased father, is not correct, I do not find any justification, whatsoever, for respondent No.1 in not disposing of the petitioner’s representation dated 10-10-2004. If his enquiry revealed that the deceased person left behind him some other legal heirs, in addition to the petitioner, he ought to have given a certificate to that effect. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to issue appropriate legal heir certificate, in pursuance of application dated 10-10-2004 made by the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 11-6-2008 MNR