ORDER : This Writ petition is filed seeking Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 for not issuing Divorce Certificate based on the divorce notice sent by the respondent No.3 dated 20.03.2011 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to consider the representation given by the petitioner on 11.08.2012 and pass orders. 2. Heard Sri Mohd. Fasiuddin, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Minority Welfare appearing on behalf of respondent No.1. No representation on behalf of the respondent No.2. 3. Though this Court on 12.12.2022 while ordering notice before admission, directed the petitioner counsel to take out personal notice to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and file proof of service. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not filed any proof of service in respect of respondent No.3. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage was performed between the petitioner and the respondent No.3 on 24.08.2008. Thereafter, disputes arose between them and respondent No.3 pronounced divorce to the petitioner on 20.03.2011 in the presence of two witnesses and sent a letter to that effect and also sent another notice on 20.07.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondent No.2 who is Qazi and submitted application on 11.08.2012 for issuance of Divorce Certificate. Respondent No.2 did not come forward to issue Divorce Certificate. On the other hand, issued a letter dated 01.12.2022 directing the petitioner to approach the Competent Court for obtaining the decree for issuance of the Divorce Certificate, though respondent No.2 is having power to issue such certificate. Hence, the writ petition. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner filed this writ petition seeking Writ of Mandamus invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India questioning the action of respondent No.2 namely Qazi Mohd. Yousufuddin, who is a Qazi, for not issuing the Divorce Certificate basing on the notices issued by respondent No.3 dated 20.03.2011 and 20.07.2011. Respondent No.2 has rightly issued reply to the petitioner on 01.12.2022 basing on the application of the petitioner dated 15.09.2022 directing the petitioner to approach the Competent Court for obtaining decree for issuance of the Divorce Certificate. The petitioner without approaching the Competent Court of law filed the present writ petition seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to issue Divorce Certificate. 6. The petitioner without approaching the Competent Court of law filed the present writ petition seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to issue Divorce Certificate. 6. It is pertinent to mention here that the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Aadil Vs. Union of India, 2022 SCC Online MP 123 held that Qazi is entitled to enter into a negotiation/mediation between the parties in order to settle the disputes but he is not having any such authority or jurisdiction to issue Divorce Certificate which is extracted below: 8. In view of the aforesaid judgment and the arguments advanced by Shri Mathur, learned Senior Counsel, the order passed by the chief Kazi on an application filed by respondent No. 8 has no legal sanctity. Respondent No. 7 being a Kazi is only entitled to enter into a negotiation/mediation between the parties in order to settle the dispute. The M.P. State Legal Services Authority is promoting community-based mediation in the State of M.P. where the trained mediators of a particular community can act as a mediator to resolve the dispute between the parties in order to end the litigation at the very inception. The Legal Services Authority, Jabalpur and Indore has trained more than 70 volunteers of different communities and religions to act as mediators to settle the dispute between the members of the community out of Court. If a Kazi entertains a dispute and acts as a mediator to settle the dispute between the members of the community that would be permissible but he cannot adjudicate the dispute like a court and pass an order like a decree. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Vishwa Lochan Madan (supra), such an order has no legal sanctity and can simply be ignored. So far the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 8 is concerning the same is not liable to be examined in this writ petition for which they are free to avail the remedy available under the law. This Court has not expressed any opinion in respect of their matrimonial matter. 7. In Mrs. Bader Sayeed, Advocate Vs. So far the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 8 is concerning the same is not liable to be examined in this writ petition for which they are free to avail the remedy available under the law. This Court has not expressed any opinion in respect of their matrimonial matter. 7. In Mrs. Bader Sayeed, Advocate Vs. Union of India, 2017 SCC Online Mad 74, the Division Bench of the High Court of Madras held that the Talaq certificate issued by the Chief Qazi is only an opinion and has no legal sanctity and the parties have to approach the competent Court. 6. In the meantime, to avoid any confusion, we issue the following directions: a) Pending consideration of the matter by the Muslim Personal Law Board, no certificate in respect of Talaq would be issued as an opinion by the Chief Kazi; b) It is clarified for purposes of Courts of legal proceedings that the certificate issued by the Chief Kazi is only an opinion and has no legal sanctity more specifically in view of Section 4 of The Kazis Act, 1880; 8. In view of the foregoing reasons, the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable under law and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to avail remedies as available under law. No costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stands closed.