Thursday, 23 June 2016

Whether father can appear and plead on behalf of his children?

At pages 80 and 82 of the paper book, two applications filed by
Sri.B.Kanagasabapathy and Sri.B.Rathnasabapathy, seeking grant of Community   
Certificate, are enclosed. It is, thus, clear that the Certificates were
sought for by Sri.B.Kanagasabapathy and Sri.B.Rathnasabapathy, respectively. 
But however, they are not the petitioners in this writ petition.
Incidentally, they might be the children of the present petitioner herein.
The petitioner, therefore, cannot appear and sue in his name on their behalf.
The petitioner should be the one, who has applied for Community Certificate,
in his name. If we permit the petitioner ? Sri.P.Balasubramaniyan, to appear
as party-in-person and plead on behalf of his children, it would amount to
practising the profession of law. Only an authorised practitioner of law, can
appear and plead on behalf of some other individual. Hence, we are of the
opinion that this writ petition is not maintainable and the objection raised
by the Registry is upheld.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               

DATED: 16.06.2016  

CORAM   
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE NOOTY.RAMAMOHANA RAO                 
AND  
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR           

W.P(MD)SR.No.31508 of 2016    

P.Balasubramaniyan                                      ... Petitioner
                
Vs.
The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office,
Manmangalam,   
Karur District ? 639 006.                               ... Respondent


PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent ? Tahsildar, Manmangalam  
Taluk Office, Karur District, to furnish Community Certificate for his sons,
B.Kanagasabapathy and B.Rathnasabapathy, based on the Tamilnadu e-District   
Entry Form, dated 20.08.2015, applied for the Community Certificate in favour
of them and available on the file of the respondent herein, within fifteen
days of the receipt of the order of this Court.

!For Petitioner         : Mr.P.Balasubramaniyan  

^For Respondent         :        
                
:ORDER  

        This writ petition is instituted by one P.Balasubramaniyan, resident of
Kagithapuram Post, Karur District. He sought for a writ of Mandamus directing
the Tahsildar, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District, to furnish Community
Certificate for his two sons, namely, Sri.B.Kanagasabapathy and
Sri.B.Rathnasabapathy. 

        2. At pages 80 and 82 of the paper book, two applications filed by
Sri.B.Kanagasabapathy and Sri.B.Rathnasabapathy, seeking grant of Community   
Certificate, are enclosed. It is, thus, clear that the Certificates were
sought for by Sri.B.Kanagasabapathy and Sri.B.Rathnasabapathy, respectively. 
But however, they are not the petitioners in this writ petition.
Incidentally, they might be the children of the present petitioner herein.
The petitioner, therefore, cannot appear and sue in his name on their behalf.
The petitioner should be the one, who has applied for Community Certificate,
in his name. If we permit the petitioner ? Sri.P.Balasubramaniyan, to appear
as party-in-person and plead on behalf of his children, it would amount to
practising the profession of law. Only an authorised practitioner of law, can
appear and plead on behalf of some other individual. Hence, we are of the
opinion that this writ petition is not maintainable and the objection raised
by the Registry is upheld. Accordingly, W.P(MD)SR.No.31508 of 2016 is 
rejected.

To
The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office,
Manmangalam,   
Karur District ? 639 006.
.

Print Page

No comments:

Post a Comment