1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)No.7428 of 2011 S.Moorthy : Petitioner vs. The Tahsildar, Karaikudi Taluk Office, Karaikudi,Sivagangai District. : Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pursuant to the impugned order in Na.Ka.A2/598/2010 dated 6.5.2010 and signed on 7.12.2010 by the respondent and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Dinesh Babu For Respondent : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, Additional Government Pleader. O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging an order passed by the Tahsildar, refusing to give a Legal Heirship Certificate. 2. Heard Mr.K.Dinesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. 3. The petitioner is the son of one Mr.K.Sivasubramanian. He died on 17.11.1997, leaving behind his wife by name S.C.Sakunthala and 3 sons and 2 daughters born through her. The petitioner's father also left behind another lady with whom he had relationship and through whom two daughters and a son had been born. 4. The petitioner and his siblings obtained a Legal Heirship Certificate dated 26.5.2000, showing the names of his mother, his blood brothers and sisters as well as the brother and sisters born to his father through the other lady. 5. Thereafter, the petitioner's mother S.C.Sakunthala also passed away. Therefore, the petitioner and his blood brothers and sisters applied for a Legal Heirship Certificate in respect of their mother who died on 16.3.2010. That application has been rejected by the respondent by the impugned order, forcing the petitioner to come up with the above writ petition. 6. Two reasons are stated in the impugned order, both of which are wrong. The first reason stated in the impugned order is that the second wife of his father was not shown in the Legal Heirship Certificate obtained, in respect of his father. The wife of a person alone can be considered to be a legal heir. All other relationships, during the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 subsistence of the marriage with the original wife, are illegal. But even illegitimate children born through such relationships are legal heirs. Therefore, in the Legal Heirship Certificate dated 26.5.2000 issued in respect of the petitioner's father, the names of the petitioner's mother, his blood brothers and sisters and the children born to the second wife, were rightly included without including the name of the second wife. 7. The second reason stated in the impugned order is that the children born to the second wife are not shown in the present application. But the present application is only for the issue of Legal Heirship Certificate in respect of the biological mother of the petitioner by name S.C.Sakunthala. The children born to the other lady are not legal heirs of S.C.Sakunthala. Therefore, both the reasons stated in the impugned order are wrong. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry and pass fresh order, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Tahsildar, Karaikudi Taluk Office, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. +1CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.40801 Svn SR : 25.11.2011 : 2p/3c W.P.(MD)No.7428 of 2011 21.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/