Judgment 1. The petitioner in this writ petition is a registered Contractor in the fourth respondent Panchayat and he is aggrieved by the impugned proceedings dated 17.07.2014, removing his name from the list of registered contractor. Earlier, the petitioner approached this Court by way of W.P.(md).No.3256 of 2014, wherein, a prayer was made to renew the petitioner's registration as registered contractor of Sathur Panchayat for the period of 2013-2014. This Court, after elaborately considering the contentions raised on either side, found that no explanation was called for before passing a resolution and the petitioner's renewal was rejected for the period of 2013-2014 without assigning any reasons. Therefore, the writ petition was allowed by an order dated 16.04.2014, by setting aside the order dated 24.12.2013. However, liberty was given to the Panchayat to issue show-cause notice to the petitioner and thereafter proceed in accordance with law for the renewal of the petitioner's contract for the period of 2013-2014. Thereafter, the petitioner sought for renewal for the period of 2013-2014 by a letter dated 18.06.2014 and also paid renewal fee on 24.06.2014. Thereafter, no further orders have been passed and all of a sudden, the impugned order has been issued to the petitioner, cancelling his name as a registered contractor. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Guru, thelearned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that prior to passing of the impugned order, no notice was issued. Cancellation of the name of a registered contractor permanently from the list attracts civil consequences and therefore, unless the petitioner is afforded an opportunity to rebutt the allegations based on which a decision has been taken, the order of cancellation of the petitioner's name from the list of contractor cannot satisfy the test of legal scrutiny. Since the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, this Court is inclined to interfere with the same. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed, and the impugned order is set aside. However, liberty is given to the fourth respondent to issue notice to the petitioner and after hearing the petitioner, the fourth respondent is directed to pass a reasoned order on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. Consequently, connected M.P.(md).Nos.1 & 2 of 2014 are closed. No costs.