Madras High Court
WP(MD)/31025/2026 of Jayes Mary Vs The Tahsildar on 2 November 2026
WP(MD) No. 31025 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
WP(MD) No. 31025 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011458172026}
and
WMP(MD) No.23820 of 2026
Jayes Mary,
No. 100/11, East Street,
Chinthamani, Madurai – 625009.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Tahsildar,
Madurai South Taluk Office,
Madurai.
2. The Village Administrative Officer,
Village Administrative Office,
Chinthamani Village, Madurai.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records relating to impugned order the first respondent in Application No.TN-7202607102461 dated 23.07.2026, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the first respondent to issue the legal heir certificate for Mr.Alagarsamy son of Sappani within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner
: Mr.V.Vinothkumar
For Respondents
: Mr.R.Parthiban
Special Government Pleader
WP(MD) No. 31025 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The rejection of the petitioner's application for a legal heir certificate is challenged in this Writ Petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner married late Mr.Alagarsamy after the death of his first wife, Mrs. Kovindammal, 31 years earlier. Therefore, he submits that the rejection of the application is unsustainable.
3. Accepting notice for both the respondents, Mr.R.Parthiban, learned Special Government Pleader, submits that the petitioner did not provide the death certificate of the first wife or even mention the date of death.
4. The petitioner has included the family card in the paper book. Said family card discloses the name of late Mr. Alagarsamy as the head of the family. It also contains the names of the father of the deceased, the petitioner and others. In these circumstances, reconsideration is warranted. In order to enable such reconsideration, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tahsildar for reconsideration. Since it is stated that Rajapandi is the son of the deceased through his
WP(MD) No. 31025 of 2026 first marriage, the Tahsildar shall record a statement from Rajapandi with regard to the asserted death of the first wife of the deceased. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. This Writ Petition is disposed of on the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 02-11-2026 Index: No Speaking Neutral Citation: No JEN To
1. The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk Office, Madurai.
2. The Village Administrative Officer, Village Administrative Office, Chinthamani Village, Madurai.
WP(MD) No. 31025 of 2026 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. JEN WP(MD) No. 31025 of 2026 02-11-2026