Order The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of order dated 22.04.2014. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioners were granted competency certificate vide order dated 31.12.2012 for a period between 01.01.2013 and 31.12.2015. The petitioners are aggrieved by issuance of order dated 22.04.2014 whereby the competency certificate dated 31.12.2012 has been revoked. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents on record. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that without affording an opportunity of hearing and without disclosing any cogent reason, the competency certificate dated 31.12.2012 has been revoked by the Chief Inspector of Factories, Jharkhand which cannot sustain the scrutiny of law. Referring to order dated 31.12.2012 (Annexure5), the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the conditions for grant of certificate has been enumerated in the said letter however, order dated 22.04.2014 does not disclose that the petitioners have violated any of the conditions mentioned in order dated 31.12.2012. It is further submitted that the order dated 22.04.2014 has been issued on an allegation that the petitioners have not submitted the requisite reports whereas, it is a matter of record that on 24.01.2014 vide Annexure9/A and Annexure9/B, the reports were submitted by the petitioners and were duly accepted in the office of Chief Factories Inspector, Jharkhand, Ranchi. The learned counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure9/C wherein the details of the work given to the petitioners have been detailed. On these grounds, it is submitted that order dated 22.04.2014 is arbitrary and it is liable to be quashed. 5. Mr. Saket Upadhyay, J.C. to A.A.G. appearing for the Respondent-State has submitted that before issuing order dated 22.04.2014 a show-cause notice dated 05.02.2014 was issued to the petitioners and since the response of the petitioners was not satisfactory vide order dated 22.04.2014, the competency certificate granted vide order dated 31.12.2012 has been revoked. It is further submitted that since a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners, there is no requirement in law to give personal hearing to the petitioners before passing the impugned order dated 22.04.2014. 6. It is further submitted that since a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners, there is no requirement in law to give personal hearing to the petitioners before passing the impugned order dated 22.04.2014. 6. From the materials on record, it appears that the petitioners were granted competency certificate vide order dated 31.12.2012 and one of the conditions of the certificate is, “Tests examinations and inspections shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Factories Act and Jharkhand Factories Rules”. The petitioners were issued show-cause notice dated 05.02.2014 stating that since last several years they have not been producing the test reports in the office of the Chief Inspector of Factories. The conditions of the certificate were not being complied with by the petitioners. The petitioners responded to the letter dated 05.02.2014 vide their response dated 24.02.2014 which simply states as under: “Please refer to your letter dated 05.02.2014 vide which has directed me to explain about my competency. Sir competency granted me on 01.01.2013 & the condition maintain in clause has already been furnished by me.” 7. A perusal of Rule 2A of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 which was adopted by the State of Jharkhand is extracted below: 4. “The Chief Inspector, if he has reason to believe that 'competent person' (a) has violated any condition stipulated in the certificate of competency; (b) has carried out a test, examination and inspection or has acted in manner inconsistent with the intent or the purpose of this Act or the Rules made thereunder, or has omitted to act as required under the Act or Rules made thereunder; (c) for any other reason to the recorded in writing; may revoke the certificate of competency after giving an opportunity to the 'competent person' for being heard”. 8. The Rule under the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 does not contemplate a personal hearing to the person before revoking the competency certificate. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the condition as stipulated in 31.12.2012 whereby the competency certificate has been granted to the petitioners has not been shown to have been violated by the petitioners, is misplaced. It is implicit in the order granting competency certificate that the competent persons are required to follow the provisions of the Factories Act as well as the Rules framed thereunder. It is implicit in the order granting competency certificate that the competent persons are required to follow the provisions of the Factories Act as well as the Rules framed thereunder. I further find no substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners that no opportunity was afforded to the petitioners. The petitioners were issued show-cause notice dated 05.02.2014 and the petitioners have given response to the show-cause notice on 24.02.2014 and this is sufficient compliance of the principles of natural justice. 9. I find no merit in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. 10. Consequently, I.A. No. 2884 of 2014 also stands disposed of.