Smt. Kollana Krupavathi v. 1. State of Telangana

Petition Under Anicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therew'th ' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direclion' more preferably in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No 3 in issuing the impugned proceedings dated 31-03-201 7 rejecting the request of the petitioner for issuance of the Family Members certificate, as highly illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia besides being violative of Principles of natural iustice, principles of promissory estoppels and doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to issue family members certificate in favour of the family of the dated 15-03-2017 made bY the petitioner in pursuance of the application petitioner to the 3rd respondent- i I ! i I I " i I l i j i I i I I E I.ANOJJIE-zo17(WPMP. NO: 20192 OF 2017) Pet lion Jnder Section 15,l CpC praying that in lhe c,rcun.rstances stated in the affidavit f led in support of the petition, the High Court m;ry be pleased to direct the 3n1 respondent herein to issue family memt:ers certi'icate in favour of the famiiy m.rnbers of the petitioner, in pursuance of the ap,p czrtion dated 15_03_ 2017 made t),, the pet t oner to the 3rd respondent, p,_.nding dir;posal of the writ petition, in the interest of justice. Counsel for lhe Petitioner : SRI Y.RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondents : Gp FOR REVENUE The Court mirde the following ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PEf,ITION No.16447 of 2Ol7 ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the entire materia-l on record' 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this writ petition is hled by the petitioner questioning the endorsement issuecl by thc rcspondent No.3 for rejecting the application made by the petitioner for issuance of the Fzrmily Mcmbers Certihcate. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader [or Revenue basing on the counter submits that the Tahsildar is not a competent authoritv to issuc kgal Ileir Certihcate for mutation of properties, but' he is competent to grve Family Member Certificate to those applicants or Legal Heirs to rcceivc clues from the I i ! i '. : o SK,J W.P.No.1t447 oJ 2017 Gover-n. nrent. But, herein the appli,:an I 1S seeking Farrri y N{ember Certificate for mutat,on of property, coff'.es rrnder succession and for that the :etitioner ner:,f to get a succession certificate frorn ttte c,lmpetent Civ'il 3or-rrt only.

4. l-e zLrned Assistant Governmen t Pler r-der for Reve ntrc further submits that the responder t No.3 is no1. €r cc'mpetent authority to issue Faroily Member CerliJ icate as per the Memo of the Go'rernment Scr-ri .:ers-lll, 3i346/Ser-II-2 l2OlO, dated 25: .1O.20 10 and eLlsr, the Memo issued by the Governrr:.ent in Memo No 1 49{>/Ser-Ill2l2Ol212, dated 25.06.2013. The respcnrle nt No.3 rightly rejected the appLrcatLon made bi, t l'r,: petitioner for granting F am i15, Member Certi'-ir::te for mutation of properties. Tht: de ceased is nor- i,: r: ovcrnment servant and reque:ste,1 to dismiss thc uri : yretition.

5. .\lte r hearing both sides ancl peru sing the malr:-ii Ll on record. this Court is of the consid:red vien, 3 SK,J W.P.N1.16447 of 2017 that the petitioner made application for granting Family Member Certihcate for mutation of property and the respondent No'3 issued impugned endorsement on the application made by the petitioner. It is a settled law that the Tahsildar is not a competent authority for issuing Family Member Certificate for mutation of properties and on making application for Family Member Certificate has to be issued by the legal heirs of the Government servarts for receiving terminal benefits of deceased Government scrvant. 6. This Court in D.I'eetaaathi @ Laaanga a' Director of Mines and Geologg, Hgderabadt held that the Tahsildar is not the competent authority lor granting legal heir certificate and the relevant portion of the said order is as follows: "Tnis Court in G' VijaYa Bhaskar and Mttnclctl. Mandol Reuenue OJficer, MonoPad Mohaboobnagar Dist.iLct Unreported decision dated O1.02.2OO1 in W.P.No.743O of 2O0O' held that the others u. , 2013 (sl ALT 489 {S.8.) I I l I i I I I l I I I I t i l I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I i 4 SK,J W. D. No.16447 of 2017 .< i.(;u e relating to legal Leirs of deceased persons has rt be decided bg tlle competent Cou.rt ttf Ciuil .,t. tisdiction and it is open to the parties to pur sue the rt\qedies auailable in laut and it ts not (tpetl to Nt r.nd al Reuenue OJficer/ Tahsildor to :<'t ti.ficates about family members. ,,n uietu of the r.t <:,:ision in G. Vijaga BLtaskar and. others u |vfandal ,L!? )etlue Officer, Manopad Mond_al, A[ahctboo,\nagar ;)ts tict, it has to be held_ that certiftctttes d-ated .,:;.0.1.2OO2 and 29.O5.2O02 issued. by .espond.ent j\ ( ). ,'l ere uttthout jurisdiction and. are the.refo,"e null rtt.tt. t,oid. Tlterefore the consequent orders d.ated t ; . )7 2OO2 and 20. I 1.2003 of res;ponCent No.2 rcct)gnizing petitioner No.1 and_ Thintpallamrta an .sirrressor lessees of D.Siua Shankar Redd_ 1 and rrter tber certificates issued bg responCent No4 are oi.sr nol legal and ualicl as no independ.ent elquiry rL'ts clone by respondent No.2 before grttntir,_g them.,, 'l h.' lir-rding of the above Judgment is squa_rely appl'r rC ll-re instant case zrnd the responclent No.3 is not rlLc cornpetent authority to iss;re t e5t,al Heir Certtli,,rr lo the petitioner. 7 , I r r t lre instant case, the deceas,_.d was, not a Govr-':r rr-cr-r1 servant. In view of the sa_rr1e. the / 5 SK,J W.P.No.16447 of 2017 Tahsildar rightly issued impugned endorsement and the petitioner can approach the competent Civil Court for succession certihcate' In view of the above hndings, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed' 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as devoidofmerits.Itisnotprecludedthatthepetitioner has to approach competent Civil Court for obtaining Succession Ce rtificate' There shall be no order as to As sequel to it, Miscellaneous .Petitions, if anY pcnding, shall stand dismisscd' //TRUE COPY// o'""uoi'*lAlt?IFF secrroPrrrcrn To Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hvderabad. [OUT] Ohe CC to SRI Y.RAMA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies 2 3 SA cHS (t/ y'^* t, t d 0,1 rtlt ztm \ht ,ATC,H c\) ,+ * HIGH CC}URT DATED:0410312025 ORDER WP.No.16447 of 2017 DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOU T COSTS. r "164 I Ii