O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.

2. Though the fourth respondent has been served and her name is also entered in the cause list, she has not chosen to enter appearance. Notice sent to the third respondent was returned as “unclaimed.

3. The petitioner's father Thiru.Veliyappathevar executed a settlement deed dated 26.08.2002 in favour of the writ petitioner. It was registered as document No.2186 of

2002 on the file of the second respondent. Ten years later, the said deed was unilaterally cancelled vide document No.2314 of 2012 dated 01.10.2012. The petitioner came to know about the same only recently. Thereafter, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. The petitioner's father passed away in the meanwhile. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner categorically asserts that till date the property has not changed hands. The said submission made by the petitioner through his counsel is placed on record.

5. It is beyond dispute that the issue raised in this writ petition is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in the decision reported i