MOHAMMAD SHAFI MALIKAND Vs. UT OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are contractors of different classes registered by the competent authority under J&K Registration of Contractors Rules, 1969 and engaged in the execution of public works allotted to them by the Government Departments from time to time. They are aggrieved of communication bearing No.PS/Commr/Secy/RDD-J/79/2023 dtd. 15/3/2023, issued by Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, whereby Director, Rural Development Department, Jammu/Srinagar, have been called upon to initiate action against the petitioners and also to ensure that no contract from Rural Development Department is allotted to them in future. The basis of the aforesaid communication is a report dtd. 15/2/2023 received from Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Jammu and Kashmir, wherein petitioners along with some other contractors have been found to have failed the security test. The list of such contractors including the petitioners herein is enclosed with the impugned communication dated 15th Marc, 2023. The petitioners have also placed on record character and antecedent verification reports of the petitioners submitted by CID, J&K, Srinagar, to the Executive Engineer, R&B Division, Kupwara, a perusal whereof shows that there is nothing adverse against the petitioners. However, in the remarks column of the reports, CID has indicated that close relatives of the petitioners i.e. brother, cousin, uncle, nephew, maternal uncle, father's maternal uncle, father etc. had in the past remained involved in subversive activities. Some of the relatives indicated in the remarks column of the verification reports are dead for the last couple of decades.

(2.) The short grievance projected by the petitioners in these petitions is that they being registered contractors are entitled to do their trade and business of executing government contractors to make their livelihood and, therefore, no authority of the government, howsoever high it may be, can take away the right to livelihood and right to do business or trade from the petitioners. It is argued on behalf of the petitioners that the impugned communication issued by the Commissioner/Secretary to Government Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj has taken away and infringed the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) In the reply affidavit filed by CID, J&K, Srinagar, the simple stand taken is that pursuant to the request received from the Executive Engineer, R&B Division, Kupwara, the character/antecedents of the petitioners were verified and final report was forwarded to the Execution Engineer concerned vide different communications which are appended by the petitioners with their petitions. It is submitted that the role of the CID is to conduct the verification of character and antecedents of the individuals and the follow-up action on the basis of such reports, if any required, is taken by the Government Department concerned. The CID, it is contended, has only an assistive and not decisive role in such matters.