Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the first respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 21.2.2012, without giving an opportunity of hearing, to the petitioner. As the said order had been passed by the first respondent, without following the principles of natural justice, it is illegal and therefore, it is liable to be set aside. 3. Even though a counter affidavit had been filed on behalf of the respondents nothing has been shown before this Court, by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, that the impugned order, dated 21.2.2012, had been passed, by the first respondent, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. In such circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 21.2.2012, is set aside and the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to carry on his business, in the shop bearing Door No.79, `G' Block, at Koyambedu Whole Sale Market Complex, (Periyar Vegetable Market), Chennai, as per the proceedings of the Chief Urban Planner, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, dated 7.6.1999, allotting the shop in favour of the petitioner, by way of transfer. 5. However, it would be open to the respondents to initiate appropriate action against the petitioner, with regard to the issue relating to the bogus legal heir certificate, said to have been produced by the petitioner, based on which the allotment had been made in his favour, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and by following the procedures established by law. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.