WHETHER SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY ADMINISTRATOR GENERAL CAN BE EQUATED WITH SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY COURT OF LAW?

[Mr. M. GOVINDARAJAN]

Section 29 of the Administrator’s General Law, 1963 provides that whenever any person has dies leaving assets within any State and the Administrator General of such State is satisfied that such assets, excluding any sum of money deposited in a Government Savings Bank or in any provident fund to which the provisions of the Provident Fund Act, 1925, apply, did not at the date of death exceed in the whole of Rs.5000/- in value, he may grant any person, claiming otherwise than as a creditor to be interested in such assets or in the due administration thereof, a certificate under his hand entitling the claimant to receive the assets therein mentioned by the deceased within the State to a value not exceeding in the whole of Rs.5,000/-

It is further provided that no certificate under this section shall be granted before the lapse of one month from the death unless before the lapse of the said one month the Administrator General is required so to do by writing under the hand of executor or the widow or other person entitled to administer the estate of the deceased and he thinks fit to grant it.   No certificate shall be granted under this section-

• Where probate of the deceased’s will or letters of administration of his estate has or have been granted; or
• In respect of any sum of money deposited in a Government Savings Bank or in any provident fund to which the provisions of the Provident Funds Act, 1925, apply.

Section 31 provides that an Administrator General shall not be bound to grant any such certificate unless he is satisfied that after making an enquiry of the title of the claimant and on the value of the assets left by the deceased within the State. Section 32 provides that a holder of a certificate shall have in respect of the assets specified in the certificate the same powers of duties and he shall be under the same liabilities as he would have had or been subject to if administration had been granted to him.

The issue to be discussed in this article whether the certificate issued by the Administrator General can be equated with the succession certificate issued by Court of law with reference to decided case law.

In ‘Kamala Banerjee & Another V. Union of India and others’ – 2013 (10) TMI 488 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT one Shri Sankar Prasad Banerjee was an employee of Kolkatta Port Trust. He dies after his retirement leaving behind his wife and four sons.   The respondent No. 4 had issued a letter intimating the wife of the deceased employee that an amount of Rs.52,385/- has been raised in favor of her deceased husband on account of arrear pensions.   She applied to the Office of Administrator General, West Bengal for issuing a succession certificate in her favor and a succession certificate was issued to her. A copy of the said succession certificate was sent to the respondent No. 4 with request to release the arrear pension. Since no payment has been received she filed a writ petition before the High Court.

The petitioner informed that she visited many a time the office of the respondent No.4 but no letter of release of the arrears of pension has been made by the 4^th respondent. Therefore she issued a legal notice for which it was requested to produce a succession certificate from the Court of Law. The petitioner contended that the Statute permits the Administrator of West Bengal to grant succession certificate, there is no reason to refuse the same.

The respondents denied the allegations of the petitioner. After the death of her husband the life time arrear pension was drawn without nomination. In the year 2004, the wife, being the legal heir was requested to submit a succession certificate in terms of the Succession Act, 1925. On 02.06.2006, the petitioner submitted a certificate from the Office of the Administrator General of West Bengal who is said to have granted the certificate on the basis of an affidavit filed by her as the dues were less than Rs. 2 lakhs.

The respondents informed that so far as the rules of the Government are concerned on 04.06.1985 the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance had issued an Office Memorandum to determine the procedure for payment of arrear of unnominated amount of a deceased pensioner.   If the arrear exceeds Rs.25,000/- payment shall be made only to the person producing the legal authority. The Kolkata Port Trust also framed its own rules following the government orders and the same specifies that any pension exceeding Rs.25,000 would be released to the heirs of the ex-employee only on production of a succession certificate.

The respondents further contended that the petitioner had produced merely a certificate on the basis of an affidavit and not a succession certificate per se issued by a District Judge or a District Delegate of a competent court of law, the amount could not be released to her. The Port authorities are also not very sure if the deceased employee had any other legal heir. It is further contended that there is no protection under the Administrator Generals Act with regard to any other legal heir of the ex-employee if he or she even claims his or her share before the respondents. The Government of India also considers succession certificate to the appropriate legal document and in the Office Memorandum issued by the Ministry of Law in 1988, it has been clearly stated that the intention in calling upon the claimant to obtain succession certificate is to get a legal document so that the claims of the rival parties may be settled once and for all.

The respondents has taken a very specific point that in the Administrators Generals Act, 1963 succession certificate has nowhere been referred to and the said Act contemplates issuing certificates for administering an estate. The petitioner replied the at the Administrator General is competent to issue succession certificate certifying that the claimant is legally entitled to get the assets of the deceased.   Such certificate cannot be annulled or rejected on the ground of any circular of rule of a Government Department. All heirs of the deceased employee have signed the petition declaring that they have no objection if the arrear pension is released in favor of their mother and as such the question of protection of the authorities under the Act does not arise.

The High Court held that there is no doubt that the procedure required for getting succession certificate is much elaborate in nature.   Notice has to be served on the rival claimants. But a certificate issued by the Administrator General is on the basis of affidavits only. It cannot be equated with that of a certificate issued by the Court of Law. The Court did not find any lack of logic in the insistence of a succession certificate from a Court of Law. If the law requires a succession certificate to be obtained from a competent court of law that cannot be short routed by obtaining a certificate under Section 29.   The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner.