Lawfully yours: By Retired Justice K Chandru | Prime Minister’s view on Tamil signatures exaggerated; signing is personal choice

Prime Minister’s view on Tamil signatures exaggerated; signing is personal choice

Recently, Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed his anguish over not receiving any letters from the ministers of Tamil Nadu bearing their signature in Tamil and said that he expected at least that much from those who are vehemently fighting the Centre's language policy. Sir, is there any rule or law imposing that government servants should put their signature only in Tamil? If so, the signature will be more legible and more vulnerable. In my view, the signature is an art of one's self and is created as per his/her whims and fancies. For the general public, the priority is safeguarding one's assets from any malpractice and guarding against forgery of a signature. As a law-abiding citizen, I want to understand the law on the Tamil signature.

-- Sugas L Vijayakumar

The Prime Minister's statement is a little exaggerated. The TN government has already issued orders that all officers must put their signatures on the files in Tamil. The majority of officials have switched over to it. Maybe some are yet to do it. But it is unfair to make such a general statement without giving the percentage of such letters that contain English signatures. Even if that's true, one can't blame the government's sincerity. It is one's choice to put their signatures in the way they want. For some, they have to get it accepted in bank documents, etc. Same case with Tamil name boards. Though there are legal requirements, many commercial establishments are yet to put them up due to a lack of prosecution under that law.

*************

Reconstruction of old apartments can be done if majority of flat owners opt for it

According to the TN Apartment Rules and Regulations, a residential association can undertake redevelopment of the complex only if the apartment is found to be in a ruinous or dilapidated condition, shows signs of decay, or poses a danger to the inhabitants. If the building is sturdy and requires only repairs, can the association still pursue a redevelopment route? How to veto such mindless pursuance even when the structure is found good? Please advise.

-- Ram VSJ

Earlier, the rule was that all flat owners must agree to the reconstruction of the old structures. However, now it is enough if the majority agrees. That is to prevent one flat owner from exercising veto power. I do not think the majority will agree to go for reconstruction unless the situation warrants. If it is a malafide decision, you can always challenge such decisions in a civil court. But that will be time-consuming, and you will end up as an enemy of the majority.