As per case facts, an MSME fertilizer manufacturer was removed from a subsidy scheme following an inspection and show cause notice, leading to several Writ Petitions challenging procedural irregularities and ... the termination order. Despite a court order setting aside the initial termination and directing a fresh hearing, the subsequent "Oral Hearing Report" reiterated the removal and suffered from significant procedural flaws, including being unsigned and upholding a previously quashed order. A later inspection found the manufacturer compliant, and the court ordered their re-introduction to the scheme. The question arose whether the manufacturer was entitled to subsidy for the interim period between the initial removal and re-introduction, considering the respondent's own guidelines prescribed proportionate penalties for first violations, not immediate removal. Finally, the court found substantial procedural and substantive errors in the respondent's actions, set aside the flawed hearing report, and directed a fresh, uninfluenced determination of subsidy eligibility for the disputed period, requiring a specific show cause notice for any FCO violations and an oral hearing by a newly nominated senior official.