SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(All) 270

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Anil Kumar Ojha, JJ.
Smt. Ram Murti Devi – Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
Writ - C No. - 4138 of 2021
Decided On : 26-03-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Salilendu Kumar Upadhyay

Point of Law: Family certificate – No application submitted for inclusion of their name in the family register – Hence inclusion of name of those persons without authority of law and are, therefore, quashed

Headnote:

Family register - Family members of deceased - To quash the family certificate and amend the register

Finding of the Court : Neither the respondent Nos. 5, 6 & 7 have moved an application before the Competent Authority i.e. the Additional Development Officer (Panchayat) for inclusion of their name in the family register nor the Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat) has passed any order for inclusion of their name after due inquiry as required under Rule 6 of the Rules. Under the circumstances the impugned order dated 04.03.2020, passed by the District Magistrate, Mainpuri, is wholly without jurisdiction. Therefore, it can not be sustained

Result: Petition allowed

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Salilendu Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nitin Kumar Agarwal, learned standing counsel for the State respondent nos. 1 to 4.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel this writ petition is being disposed of without calling for a counter affidavit.

Facts

3. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the petitioner is the wife of late Sri Radhey Shyam. A copy of page No.168 of family register of Village Panchayat -Dostpur, Tehsil -Karhal, District – Mainpuri, has been appended as Annexure 10 to the writ petition which shows that the name of the petitioner and six others were initially recorded in the family register. Subsequently, the office of the District Magistrate issued a certificate No.1495, dated 04.03.2020 titled as "Sansodhit Parivari Jan Praman Patra" by which he included the respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 alongwith the petitioner and her family members. Accordingly, the names of the respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 were entered in the family register by the Village Development Officer vide entry dated 18.03.2020. Aggrieved with the aforesaid entry made in the family register relating to the petitioners family, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for the following relief :-

    “(A) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the family certificate dated 04.03.2020 (Annexure No.9 to the writ petition) issued by second respondent.

(B) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashingtheamendedentryinfamilyregisterdated18.03.2020 (Annexure No.10 to this writ petition) made by respondent no.4.”

Submissions

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that order dated 04.03.2020, passed by the office of the District Magistrate, Mainpuri, and the consequential entries made in the family register by the Additional Village Development Officer, dated 18.03.2020 are wholly without authority of law inasmuch as the provisions of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970, do not empower the District Magistrate to pass such an order.

5. Learned standing counsel has filed today a short counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no.2 which runs in four paragraphs. In paragraph 3 of the short counter affidavit the respondent no.2 has stated as under :-

    “That in this regard it is submitted that the case of the petitioner is respondent no.2 has issued the family certificate dated 04.03.2020, whereas in this regard it is submitted that the respondent no.2 has not issued any kind of family certificate in favour of any person annexed as Annexure No.9 of the writ petition.

In this regard it is submitted that the heading of that certificate is amended family relation certificate, which has been issued by In-charge Officer/Deputy Collector only to this extent that it relates to a matter of Rs. 5000/-. Apart from this if any dispute arises it shall be suo-moto deemed to be cancelled, therefore, contention of the petitioner is apparently absolutely incorrect.”

Discussion and Findings

6. On 23.03.2021, this Court passed an order in which the aforesaid Rules, 1970, was specifically referred and it was observed that prima facie the order of the District Magistrate, Mainpuri dated 04.03.2020, appears to be without jurisdiction and yet the respondent no.2 in the aforesaid short counter affidavit dated 26.03.2021 has not disclosed his source of power to issue the amended family members certificate.

7. The U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970, reads as under :-

    “1. Short title and commencement. (1) These rules may be called the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970.

(2) They shall come into force with effect from the date of their publication in the Gazette.

2. Form and preparation of family register.- A family register in Form 'A' shall be prepared containing family wise the names and particulars of all persons or

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top