A 22-year-old photograph shows Rohit when he was seven, his mother Ujjwala and ND Tiwari

New Delhi, Nov. 26: The man who claims N.D. Tiwari sired him no longer wants to give the veteran leader the option of accepting him as his son — he wants him to take a DNA test.

Sources close to Rohit Sharma said the 29-year-old had been “deeply hurt” by what Tiwari’s lawyer said in the high court yesterday.

The Andhra Pradesh governor’s counsel reportedly said Tiwari was a respectable public figure and could not be linked to anybody making a claim.

Rohit — a lawyer himself and grandson of former central minister Sher Singh — claims he was born out of a relationship between his mother Ujjwala Singh and the Congress veteran. But he has sought no financial benefits in his paternity suit filed in April.

Rohit’s counsel Y.P. Nanda furnished old photographs showing Rohit, Ujjwala and Tiwari.

“But now that Tiwari’s lawyer sought to humiliate him, Rohit will not settle for anything less than a DNA test to establish his claim,” a source close to him said.

The development came a day after Delhi High Court asked the Congress leader to appear before it in the paternity suit, making him possibly the first serving governor to be called to court for personal appearance.

Tiwari is “not above the law”, Justice Reva Khetrapal said yesterday, asking Tiwari to come to her chamber on December 16 in connection with the case.

In-chamber hearings are closed to the media and the public, and courts often resort to them to work out a compromise in personal or family matters.

The 85-year-old is likely to challenge the order in the Supreme Court saying Article 361 gave him immunity from such suits, though legal opinion is divided on the issue.

Rohit’s mother Ujjwala, who has been served a notice, too, is believed to have prepared her reply to Tiwari’s description of her as an “unchaste woman”.

Tiwari said Ujjwala had him as her “paramour” even during the “subsistence of her marriage”.

Sources in Rohit’s family ruled out the possibility of an out-of-court settlement.

They said in 1995, an initiative had been taken by a close associate of Tiwari and a senior Congress leader but it fell through because of mutual distrust.

Senior party leaders who did not want to be named said it was up to Tiwari’s “conscience” to take the final call.

They said as a freedom fighter and an astute politician, Tiwari should decide for himself.

“He is well aware of the public sensitivity and propriety involved in such matters,” an AICC general secretary said.

“We are sure that before December 16, he will not set any wrong precedent,” the leader added.

These party leaders said in keeping with Congress traditions, battles like these were best fought in an individual capacity.

Some legal experts like former additional solicitor general Raju Ramachandran saw nothing wrong in a governor being asked to appear before a court in a family matter.

However, a Union minister well versed in law said Tiwari might earn a reprieve if he moved the Supreme Court as a governor’s immunity cover was sweeping.