MOHD YOUSUF WANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CLAIMING to be a registered contractor the petitioner is aggrieved of order no. FST/SFC/18/03 dated 11.03.2005 purporting to have been issued by respondent -department whereunder he has been sought to be black -listed for award of any Government/PSU contract; and impugns the same with a prayer to have it quashed on the ground that besides violating his right to undertake his chosen profession it also puts a stigma to his character and is thus bad in law, particularly of its having been passed without hearing petitioner.

(2.) IN their reply, respondents have inter alia contended that petitioner was involved in a criminal case being FIR no. 11/04 purporting to have been registered by Vigilance Organization on the basis of his reported misconduct which necessitated his blacklisting in terms of the impugned communication. During their threshold arguments counsel appearing at bar have reiterated their respective pleadings, and canvassed their contentions with reference to annexures appended therewith.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel and considered the matter. The whole thing appears to have started with a letter purporting to have been written by DIG Vigilance to Principal Secretary to Government, General Administrative Department (GAD) under his no. CU -Policy -Tax -314/2005 -13/57 dated 23.11.2004 informing about registration of case under FIR No. 11/01 u/s 5(1) (d), 5(2) P.C Act read with section 120 -B and 380 RPC relating to alleged mis -use of office by certain officers of Forest Corporation in collusion with petitioner resulting in enhancing extractions and manning rates of timber in forest compartments V 9, V 10 and R 1.8 in Pulwama area, and thereby causing loss to State exchequer. As per said letter during petitioners house searching an official file pertaining to management decision no. 13 and 16 of 1997 regarding enhancement of manning, extractions and transportation rates of timber was recovered besides a diary in which he has kept record of bribe money alleged to have been paid to various official/officers of Forest Corporation which were admitted by him during course of interrogation. While communicating aforesaid information the Vigilance Organization sought petitioner's black -listing which was directed under the impugned communication addressed by Dy. Secretary of Forest department to Managing Director of State Forest Corporation asking him to formally black -list the petitioner and publicize the same through print media; apparently without hearing the petitioner which prompted him to institute the writ petition.