ORDER A. R. TIWARI, J. - This petition, presented under article 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenges the order No. 20405 dated December 20, 1985, issued by General Manager, District Industries Centre, Indore respondent No. 3(iv), thereby cancelling the certificate of eligibility for deferment of payment of sales tax (annexure "P/9"). Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company having its office at Indore and carries' on business of manufacture and sale of industrial tools and machineries on the strength of the licence and registration obtained by it from the department of industries. The petitioner No. 2 is the share holder of this company. The petitioner No. 1 was granted eligibility certificate permitting deferment of payment of sales tax in conformity with the scheme formulated by respondent No. 1 (State of M.P.) and thus claimed to be entitled to the benefit of deferred payment in terms of the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Deferment of Payment of Tax Rules, 1983. The aforesaid respondent, however, cancelled the certificate and thus consigned the petitioners to pay the sales tax without benefit of deferment by order annexure "P/9". Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. The respondents have filed the return in oppugnation. I have heard both the sides. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the amount has been deposited as per the eligibility certificate but on disposal of this petition, the respondents may claim interest/penalty on account of delayed payment. He submitted that respondent No. 3(iv) erred in law in cancelling the certificate arbitrarily without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The Government Advocate for the respondents was unable to show that any hearing was afforded to the petitioners before passing the order impugned in this writ petition. He, however, submitted that in view of the absence of hearing, merits of the matter may be left untouched and liberty be given to respondent No. 3(iv) to hear the petitioner, if any action is deemed necessary, and pass fresh order in conformity with law. Admittedly the order (annexure "P/9") was passed without hearing. It is trite law that eligibility once earned is not lost by any subsequent event. Admittedly the order (annexure "P/9") was passed without hearing. It is trite law that eligibility once earned is not lost by any subsequent event. In [1991] 83 STC 234 (SC); AIR 1992 SC 152 (Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilisers Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes) it is held that eligibility earned once is not lost by subsequent notification. On the point of principles of natural justice, it is held in AIR 1973 SC 834 (State of Punjab v. K. R. Erry and Sobhag Rai Mehta) as under : "..... With the proliferation of administrative decisions in the welfare State it is now further recognised by courts both in England and in this country, that where a body or authority is characteristically administrative the principle of natural justice is also liable to be invoked if the decision of that body or authority affects individual rights or interests and having regard to the particular situation it would be unfair for the body or authority not to have allowed a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Case Law Discussed. M. Narasimhachar v. State of Mysore AIR 1960 SC 247 , distinguished." Testing the facts and circumstances of the instant case, on the linchpin of the aforesaid principle of law, it becomes clear that the order (annexure "P/9") is liable to be dislodged and demolished. Accordingly I quash the order (annexure "P/9") but with liberty to respondent No. 3(iv) to hear the petitioner No. 1 on this issue, if any action is found necessary, and pass appropriate order in conformity with law. In that event, if any order is rendered against the petitioners, they shall have liberty to pursue appropriate remedy thereafter. This petition thus stands allowed in terms indicated above but without any order as to costs. The security amount, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioners, after due verification. Petition allowed accordingly.