JUDGMENT : This petition by 281 persons claiming to be working as need based casual labourers in the Public Health Engineering (PHE) Division, Handwara, challenges the order issued by the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Kashmir, Srinagar, under endorsement no.PHE/Estt/446-50 dated 11.04.2017, in consideration of the case of the petitioners pursuant to the order of the Court dated 16.04.2012 read with order dated 19.04.2012 passed in the petitioners’ earlier writ petition, SWP no.2023/2009, rejecting the claim of the petitioners, stating that the records available reveal that they have not worked and are not entitled to any wages. 2. Petitioners claiming to have been so engaged in 2006, approached the Court in SWP no.2023/2009 with the prayer for payment of their earned wages and for direction to the respondents to give them the benefit flowing from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hassan Anzulla v State of J&K, Civil Appeal no.4529/90, decided on 12.11.1991. 3. The Court disposed of the petitioners’ aforesaid writ petition by order dated 16.04.2012 with a direction to the respondents to implement the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hassan Anzulla’s case, and to consider the claim of the petitioners for release of their legally earned wages. While issuing the aforesaid direction, the Court relied on annexure K to the writ petition which was the report on the release of wages of casual labourers/need based workers of PHE Division, Handwara, made by the Inquiry Committee constituted by the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Kashmir, vide order no.PHE/Estt/5768-73 dated 06.06.2007 of the Officers of the Department of the rank of Superintending Engineers. The Court, in para 3 of its order in this regard said as under:- “3. The Report on release of wages of casual labourers/need based workers of Public Health Engineering (PHE) Division, Handwara (annexure K to the writ petition), recommend that for release of wages for the pending period prior to 05.06.2007 to be considered later on its merits only after the genuineness of these pending claims are got verified by the Departmental Committee constituted by the Administrative Department for this purpose. The report in respect of those, which are cleared, is to be considered and decision taken thereof as well.” 4. The report in respect of those, which are cleared, is to be considered and decision taken thereof as well.” 4. Consequent to the aforesaid direction, the Chief Engineer has passed the impugned order dated 11.04.2017 concluding as under:- “Whereas the case of the petitioner(s) was considered in light of the Hon’ble High Court order and it was found that the wages in favour of the genuine daily wagers, ITI and casual labourers working in the division are being paid at par to other PHE divisions of the valley and also as per the records available reveals that the petitioners have not worked and are not entitle(d) for any wages. Hence the claim of the petitioners is rejected.” 5. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid order on the grounds that respondent no.3 has passed it simply on the basis of communication dated 08.07.2013 of the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara. and the report dated 07.10.2015 of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Kashmir, ignoring, firstly, his own communication dated 11.10.2014; secondly, the consideration orders dated 14.11.2014, 07.01.2015, 11.03.2015 and 23.3.2015; thirdly, the communications dated 11.06.2016; fourthly, the compliance report submitted on behalf of the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, in response to the order of the Court dated 10.05.2016; fifthly, the communication dated 16.07.2016 of the Chief Engineer, PHE Department; sixthly the communications dated 18.01.2017, 28.02.2017 and 29.03.2017 addressed by respondent no.5 to respondent no.3 and to the learned State Counsel, Ms. Moksha Kazmi, AAG. 6. The petitioners further rely on the attendance certificates issued by the officers in their favour from 05.06.2007 to 11/2012; 12/2012 to 08/2013 and from 09/2013 to 11/2014, photocopies whereof have been placed on record as annexures A59 to A61. It is averred that the impugned order has been passed mechanically and in colourable exercise of power. 7. The petitioners also state that pursuant to the recommendations of the High Level Officers’ Committee, the petitioners were ordered to work as per the place of posting indicated in orders issued by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, bearing no.2054-60 dated 10.05.2013 and 629-29 dated 06.06.2016. It is contended that in face of these orders, the impugned order is imaginary, fanciful and based on extraneous material. 8. It is contended that in face of these orders, the impugned order is imaginary, fanciful and based on extraneous material. 8. It is also averred by the petitioners that they have been validly engaged by the respondents and have been working continuously without any interruption or break; therefore, they are entitled to payment of wages as directed by the Court in terms of its order dated 16.04.2012 passed in the petitioners’ earlier writ petition. The petitioners’ further case is that the impugned order does not only deny their wages, but has also the effect of denying them permanent absorption; therefore, the order is capricious and arbitrary, violative of the legal, constitutional rights of the petitioners. It is pleaded that the respondents are not only obliged under law to allow the petitioners to continue as Need Based Casual Labourers and pay them their wages for the period they have not been paid, they are also obliged to absorb them in service on permanent basis in terms of the directions of the Court dated 16.04.2012 and the Supreme Court judgment in Hassan Anzulla’s case. 9. On behalf of the respondents, reply has been filed by one Mr. Najeeb Tramboo, Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara. The said reply wholly relies on the contents of the impugned order. 10. I heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter. 11. In light of the clear cut stand taken by the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Kashmir, in the impugned order, repeated in the reply affidavit, that, as per the records available, the petitioners have not worked and are not entitled to any wages, a heavy burden is cast on the petitioners to clearly establish that they were, in fact, engaged and have worked or are working as need based casual labourers; otherwise the matter has all the trappings of falling in the realm of disputed fact and this Court in its writ jurisdiction cannot hold an enquiry to determine a disputed fact. 12. It cannot be disputed that there has been a practice in the PHE Department of engaging need based casual labourers and, in that connection, the concerned officers posted in the Division have been requesting the higher authorities of the Department for allotment of funds to defray the wages of such labourers. 12. It cannot be disputed that there has been a practice in the PHE Department of engaging need based casual labourers and, in that connection, the concerned officers posted in the Division have been requesting the higher authorities of the Department for allotment of funds to defray the wages of such labourers. It transpires from the documents appended with the writ petition that the demand for allotment of funds has been made from time to time and sought to be substantiated by list(s) of such labourers with all relevant particulars of such engagements etc. 13. It is the specific case of the petitioners that they have been engaged in 2006. There is also no doubt that they had approached the Court in 2009 in SWP no.2023 claiming to be need based casual labourers with the grievance that they have not been paid the legally earned wages. Therefore, they would need to show to the Court from the documents appended with the writ petition that their names, in fact, figured in any such list before they had filed their earlier writ petition in 2009. This becomes imperative, firstly, because there are allegations of criminal conspiracy between some local officers/officials of the Department and these petitioners of fabricating the documents and, secondly, because the order dated 16.04.2012 passed by the Court while disposing of the petitioners’ earlier writ petition, SWP no.2023/2009, did not determine the entitlement of the petitioners or record a finding that the petitioners had, in fact, been engaged or were working as such. The Court left it to the respondents to consider and take a decision in that regard. Therefore, mere reliance on any communication originating from any field officer requesting for funds from the higher authorities, without there being a list of such need based casual labourers attached thereto and placed before the Court as evidence would not substantiate the plea of the petitioners that such funds were demanded to defray their wages. In order to substantiate their plea, the petitioners have placed numerous documents on record as Annexures to the writ petition. These documents pertain to different periods, the first being the period upto the date they filed their first writ petition, SWP no.2023/2009; the second being the period during which the petition remained pending before the Court; the third being the period after disposal of the writ petition, including post filing of the Contempt petition no. These documents pertain to different periods, the first being the period upto the date they filed their first writ petition, SWP no.2023/2009; the second being the period during which the petition remained pending before the Court; the third being the period after disposal of the writ petition, including post filing of the Contempt petition no. 161/2013 and post great floods of September 2014. These documents are voluminous and are likely to overburden this judgment, yet, let the same be examined one by one to ascertain whether the petitioners succeed in establishing their claim. First period upto the filing of the writ petition, SWP no.2023/2009: i. Annexure A1 is a list of the alleged need based casual labourers of PHE Division, Handwara. It is not signed by any person, no does it have the semblance of being an official document. It, therefore, is nothing more than a list prepared by the petitioners themselves on a computer; ii. Annexure A-2 is a communication addressed by Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, under No.1550-53 dated 11.09.2006 to the District Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara H.Q., Handwara, enclosing a list of need based casual labourers of PHE Division, Handwara, for arranging release of funds. Copies of this communication are shown to have been endorsed to the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Kashmir, Srinagar, and Assistant Executive Engineers of Sub-Division Handwara and Villgam for their information. The list supposed to have been enclosed with this communication, which could substantiate the petitioners’ plea of their engagement and the fact that the funds were sought to meet their wages, has not been placed on record of this petition; iii. Annexure A-3 is communication no.1006-11 dated 18.09.2006 addressed by the District Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara H.Q., Handwara, to the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Kashmir, referring to the Executive Engineer, Handwara’s aforesaid letter, and requesting that the funds demanded by the Executive Engineer may be arranged and released. Alongwith this letter, the Superintending Engineer is shown to have enclosed the list of need based casual labourers, but the same has, again, not been placed on record of this petition. It therefore, does not establish anything favouring the petitioners; iv. Annexure A-4 is a hand written communication under no.SDH/466 dated 20.12.2006 of AEE, Handwara, to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, requesting him to approach higher authorities for arrangement/allotment of wages for 573 persons as need based casual labourers. It therefore, does not establish anything favouring the petitioners; iv. Annexure A-4 is a hand written communication under no.SDH/466 dated 20.12.2006 of AEE, Handwara, to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, requesting him to approach higher authorities for arrangement/allotment of wages for 573 persons as need based casual labourers. It does not bear the list and, in any case, does not establish that these 573 persons included the names of the petitioners herein; v. Annexure A-6 (not A-5) is a DO no.PS/HM/PHE, I&FC, H&T/07/34 dated 16.03.2007 written by Mr. Mohammad Dilawar Mir, the Minister for Public Health Engineering, Irrigation, Flood Control, Horticulture and Tourism, J&K, to the Joint Director, Planning, Hydraulic, Civil Secretariat enclosing a list of 517 “candidates” working as need based casual labourers in PHE Division Handwara. It is mentioned therein that out of these, 100 labourers were already drawing their wages and the remaining 417 had been without wages for last three months (obviously indicating that these workers had been probably engaged in January of that year). Referring to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara’s letter no.1550-53 dated 11.09.2006 (which was not in any way sent to the Minister), the Minister said that the concerned Executive Engineer had sought release of funds for payment of their wages vide the aforesaid letter. The Minister further said that the financial year was nearing to an end and the casual labourers were facing a hardship, therefore, he ordered release of funds to the tune of Rs.30 lacs in the first instance to be kept at the disposal of the Executive Engineer to enable him to pay wages of the enlisted casual labourers. Whatever be discernable from this DO, the list of the alleged 517 ‘candidates’ has again not been placed on record of this petition. Therefore, the plea of the petitioners remains unsubstantiated; vi. Now comes Annexure A-5; this is a communication no.PW/Hyd/S/356/05-06 dated 16.03.2007, with the caption “Release of wages of casual labourers/need based workers”, written by Joint Director (P), PHE, Irrigation and Flood Control, to the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Kashmir, enclosing copies of the Minister’s above DO and his earlier DO dated 06.01.2006 alongwith the Executive Engineer’s aforesaid letter no.1550-53 dated 11.9.2006 together with a list of ‘479’ need based workers stated therein to have been signed by the concerned Executive Engineer, informing the Chief Engineer that these workers had met the Minister for release of wages. The Joint Director requested the Chief Engineer to release wages in their favour as had been desired by the Minister with information to him, as aforesaid, that funds for the same had been released under Object Head Operation & Maintenance of ARWSP and Annual Plan 2006-07. Though a list of workers comprising 18 pages, stated to have been signed by the Executive Engineer, is shown to have been enclosed with this communication, but such list has not been placed on record of this writ petition to establish the plea in question; vii. It appears that on receipt of the aforesaid communication from the Joint Director, Planning Hydraulic, Civil Secretariat, the Chief Engineer issued an order under endorsement no.PHE/Estt/5768-73 dated 05.06.2007 constituting a committee comprising Superintending Engineer, PHE Mech. Circle (north), Srinagar (Departmental Vigilance Officer) as Head of the Committee with the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Srinagar; the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Anantnag; Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Handwara; and the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Kupwara, as its Members, to verify the matter and look into the genuineness of the case, A copy of this order was endorsed to the Commissioner/Secretary to Government, PHE, I&FC Department for information. It, thus, becomes axiomatic that the Chief Engineer had some doubts about the genuineness of the list of these need based workers even when the same had originated from the Minister concerned; viii. Annexure A-8 comprises of the minutes of the meeting of the aforesaid enquiry committee held on 03.09.2007 circulated under endorsement no.SE/MCN/3258-63 dated 21.09.2007. This document shows that the Committee decided that in order to ascertain the factual position, the following information documents be obtained from the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara: a. Year-wise list of labourers engaged on need basis prior to imposition of ban viz. upto 31.03.1994 and had not been regularised. This document shows that the Committee decided that in order to ascertain the factual position, the following information documents be obtained from the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara: a. Year-wise list of labourers engaged on need basis prior to imposition of ban viz. upto 31.03.1994 and had not been regularised. It was mentioned that the list must indicate full particulars with date of engagement; b. Year-wise list of labourers engaged on need basis after imposition of ban i.e., from 01.04.1994 with full particulars and date of engagement; c. Proof of their age and residence with Tehsil and District; d. Wages paid till date (i.e., till the information was supplied); e. Original copies of vouchers (Master Sheet) against which wages had been drawn and disbursed; The Committee also decided that in order to examine the matter, the list of labourers in respect of PHE Division, Handwara, submitted to the Government, from time to time, be obtained from Chief Engineer. The next date of meeting was decided to be fixed on receipt of the information/documents. Copies of the minutes containing the decisions were endorsed to all concerned for immediate submission of the information/documents. ix. Meanwhile, some vigilance verification appears to have commenced in the State Vigilance Organization under Verification No. SVO-Veri-BK-29/07-4625 dated 20.04.2007 concerning daily rated workers in PHE Division, Handwara. Annexure A-9 is a communication no.SS/VOBKB/Veri-29/07-136 dated 08.11.2007 written by the Senior Superintendent of Police, State Vigilance Organization BKB, Srinagar, to the Commissioner of Vigilance, J&K, Jammu, informing him that Government had not sanctioned any amount to be disbursed among daily rated workers as was clear from the letter dated 19.07.2007 of the Incharge Executive Engineer, PHE, Handwara. He further mentioned that the genuineness of number of daily rated workers was got ascertained through enquiry officer and it was found that none of these workers was working on fictitious names; however misuse of Government funds in respect of their wages could not be ruled out as the records maintained at division level in respect of these workers were not transparent enough. So this communication clearly mentions that the records maintained were not transparent enough; x. Annexure A-10 is communication no.1792-93 dated 18.11.2007 written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to the Head of the Committee, i.e., the Superintending Engineer, PHE Mech. So this communication clearly mentions that the records maintained were not transparent enough; x. Annexure A-10 is communication no.1792-93 dated 18.11.2007 written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to the Head of the Committee, i.e., the Superintending Engineer, PHE Mech. Circle (north), Srinagar (Departmental Vigilance Officer) purporting to be in response to above said Annexure A-8, furnishing three lists as annexures A, B and C thereto with respect to 573 such labourers. The annexures of the communication containing the lists of 573 labourers have not been placed on record of this petition alongwith the letter. Result is obvious: the communication does not establishment the plea of the petitioners. It is worthy of notice that the Executive Engineer enclosed with his aforesaid communication “applications and letters endorsed by various Ministers/MLAs (57 leaves) in original”; xi. Annexure A-11 is communication no.DSE/HH/Estt/386-63 dated 23.01.2008 written by District Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle Kupwara, HQ, Handwara, to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, requiring him to prepare and submit the requisite information, complete in all respects, to the Superintending Engineer, PHE Mech. Circle, North, Srinagar (Chairman, Enquiry Committee). This establishes that the information sought for from the Executive Engineer in terms of decisions of the Enquiry Committee, circulated in the shape of minutes of the meeting dated 03.09.2007 under endorsement dated 21.09.2007 had not been fully and completely furnished by him; xii. Annexure A-12 is communication no.SE/MCN/149/299-303 dated 25.04.2008 written by Superintending Engineer, PHE Mech. Circle North, Srinagar, to the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir, enclosing therewith the report prepared by the Enquiry Committee pursuant to its meeting held on 26.08.2006 for further action, This brings the matter to the crucial aspect of the findings of the Committee. Some parts this report containing the findings of the Committee shed a great light on the subject in issue. The relevant excerpts of this report are quoted hereunder: Page 2 of the report: “The Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, was also directed to provide the information/documents cited above. But till date no information/documents have been received despite repeated reminders issued by the Superintending Engineer, PHE Mechanical Circle North Srinagar and Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle Kupwara vide following references …” Page 3 of the report: “After deliberations, it was decided that to have a thorough probe into the matter, Sh. Mohd. But till date no information/documents have been received despite repeated reminders issued by the Superintending Engineer, PHE Mechanical Circle North Srinagar and Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle Kupwara vide following references …” Page 3 of the report: “After deliberations, it was decided that to have a thorough probe into the matter, Sh. Mohd. Shafi, Head Assistant (Establishment Section) of direction office was included as a co-opted member who shall have to attend the meetings with all the records available in the Direction Office pertaining to the case. During the deliberations in the various meetings some daily rated workers have submitted representations along with list of labourers to Superintending Engineer, PHE Mechanical Circle North Srinagar in the capacity of Departmental Vigilance Officer showing therein number of labourers who are working in PHE Division Handwara. The said lists are in three statements marked as Annexures A, B and C which show number of Casual Labourers as: 1. Annexure A 573 Casual Labours 2. Annexure B 115 Casual Labours 3. Annexure C 58 Casual Labours These lists stand forwarded to Executive Engineer, PHE Division Handwara vide letter No.5127-29 dated 07.01.2008 for furnishing his detailed report which is still awaited from the concerned Division. Also original records were not available with the Direction Office Representations along with lists and above cited forwarding letter are appended as Annexure for reference.” Page 6 & 7 of the report: “In view of non-availability of records to be produced by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division Handwara, the Committee could not finalize the authenticity of the list of daily rated workers and the number thereof. It may be added here that the Administrative Department has already constituted a committee of following officers for each PHE Division in the State vide Govt. order no.264 of 2007 dated 31.08.2007 to verify the authenticity of all the need based workers/casual labourers: 1. Executive Engineer of the Division 2. Tehsildar 3. SHO 4. It may be added here that the Administrative Department has already constituted a committee of following officers for each PHE Division in the State vide Govt. order no.264 of 2007 dated 31.08.2007 to verify the authenticity of all the need based workers/casual labourers: 1. Executive Engineer of the Division 2. Tehsildar 3. SHO 4. AAO of R&B Division As such, it is the domain of the said Committee to verify the particulars and authenticity of need based workers and the Committee constituted by the Chief Engineer, Kashmir, PHE Department, Srinagar could not finalize the genuineness of the issue regarding the release of long pending wages due to the genuine need based workers for the last number of years and the number thereof reportedly working in PHE Division Handwara as most of the records were reported to be lying with Police and Vigilance Organization, partly gutted and partly misplaced as reported by the concerned Executive Engineer.” It may be mentioned here that, apart from the above, at page 4 of the report, the Committee recorded as under: “The Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle Kupwara and Executive Engineer PHE Division Handwara have informed the Committee verbally that tremendous indiscipline in the Division has been caused due to non-settlement of the case which has jeopardized smooth functioning of PHE Division Handwara due to non-settlement of the case of the aspirants/claimant. Regular demonstrations and protests are being held by the claimants at Divisional Office level, Circle Office level and Director Office level which has become a nuisance for the Department, as such the issue needs to be settled on its merit on top priority especially keeping in view the fact that the administrative department had already released Rs. 30.00 lacs in 3/2007 for the disbursement of pending wages of these casual/need based workers. 30.00 lacs in 3/2007 for the disbursement of pending wages of these casual/need based workers. It was also informed by the Executive Engineer concerned that services of these claimants are badly needed by him for operation and maintenance of the Water Supply Schemes, watch and ward of service lines and Government asset because the division is already facing dearth of field staff as the sanctioned strength of the Division in respect of field staff is less than the actual requirement as number of schemes are completed and commissioned every year which adversely affects maintenance, supervision and functioning of various schemes.” Page 7 of the report: The Committee concluded the report as under: “Under these constraints and to ease out the situation for the time being for smooth functioning of water supply schemes in the general interest of the public, the Committee unanimously recommends the case to Chief Engineer for considering release of wages by the Executive Engineer in favour of genuine need based workers subject to the conditions that:- (a) In the first instance the Executive Engineer may release wages pending screening through a committee of officers/officials to be nominated by him for the individual verification of the particulars of the Need Based Workers as contained in the lists and the authenticity of the claims of these workers who have physically and actually worked at various sites and for the period the Executive Engineer is convinced that the records are available and retrievable and not before 05.06.2007, in any case, the date when the case was sent to this committee for scrutiny. (b) The identification and verification of these need based workers shall include checking of their bona fides such as name, parentage/residence/date of birth/qualification and period worked etc. after thorough identification parade. (c) The Executive Engineer may utilize the services of these need based workers as per norms and as per his field requirements out of the lists of casual labourers duly verified by him in light of Sec (a) and (b) above but excluding persons whose performance of duty at far flung areas away from their homes the Executive Engineer feels is doubtful. (d) The case for release of wages for the pending period prior to 05.06.2007 should be considered later on its merits only after the genuineness of these pending claims are got verified by the Departmental Committee constituted by the Administrative Department for this purpose.” It becomes axiomatic from a perusal of this report that, firstly, the Executive Engineer failed to provide the requisite documents and information to the Committee as had been called for from him; secondly, the Committee, therefore, could not, and did not, ascertain the genuineness of the need based workers; thirdly, the Committee found that the Administrative Department had constituted a Committee under Government order no.264 of 2007 dated 31.08.2007 to verify the authenticity of all the need based workers/casual labourers, comprising officers mentioned in the relevant para of the report and, therefore, the Committee said that it was the domain of the said Committee to verify the particulars and authenticity of such need based workers, and that the Committee itself could not finalize their genuineness; fourthly, the Committee recorded that these claimants had created a nuisance by holding demonstrations and protests regularly in front of divisional, circle and direction offices; fifthly, they therefore, recommended release of wages by the Executive Engineer in favour of genuine need based workers to ease out the situation and subject to the conditions stipulated in the report. Obviously, by this report, the plea of the petitioners is not at all supported or established in any sense. xiii. Annexure A-13 is a communication, bearing no.373-74 dated 09.05.2008, written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, HQ Handwara, enclosing certain statements and information in respect of additional requirement of Operation and Maintenance staff. The statements do not, in any way, establish that petitioners had been engaged or that they were working; xiv. Annexure A-14 is a communication, bearing no.PHE/Estt/3724-31 dated 17.05.2008, written by the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Srinagar, to the Principal Secretary to Government, PHE, I&FC Department, in reference to the communication dated 16.03.2017 of Joint Director (P), PHE, I&FC Department, informing him about the report made by the Enquiry Committee constituted by the Chief Engineer, and seeking further instructions in this regard. This communication does not help the petitioners to establish their claim in any way; xv. This communication does not help the petitioners to establish their claim in any way; xv. Annexure A-15 is a communication, bearing no.CE/PHE/Plg/1229 dated 16.09.2008, written by Chief Engineer to the Principal Secretary to Government, PHE Department, informing him that the number of need based labourers had reached to an enormous figure of 6875 for whom an amount of Rs.1790.25 lac rupees were required and demanded to meet their wages. This communication again does not establish the plea of the petitioners that they had been engaged or that they were working or that the funds were sought to meet their wages; xvi. Annexure A-16 is a reminder under no.PHE/Estt/13237 dated 25.09.2008 written by Chief Engineer to the Government in the PHE Department seeking funds; xvii. Annexure A-17 is communication dated 02.03.2009 written by Principal Secretary to Government, PHE Department to the Chief Engineer in reference to earlier letter dated 16.03.2007 requiring him to sort out the case at his own level under rules; Second period during which the petition remained pending before the Court: xviii. Annexure A-18 is communication no.PHE/Hand/1081 dated 25.08.2010 written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to Mr. N. H. Shah, learned Deputy Advocate General, stating therein that the need based labourers who had filed the writ petition were working in different scheme as per norms but due to lack of funds they were not being paid wages. As would be seen later, the District Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, Headquarter Handwara, vide his communication dated 29.03.2013 (Annexure A-25), had asked the Executive Engineer of the time to verify the status of the writ petitioners in context of his predecessor aforesaid communication dated 25.08.2010. The Executive Engineer vide Annexure A-28 reported that such petitioners had neither been engaged, nor worked nor paid. xix. Annexure A-19 is a communication no.PHE/Hand/2959-62 dated 03.02.2011 written by Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to the Chief Engineer concerning the subject of SWP no.2023/09, i.e., the earlier writ petition of the petitioners, enclosing the list of ‘candidates’ who claimed to have been engaged as need based casual labourers. The list is said to have contained the signatures of Mr. Naseer Ahmad Dar, Ex. Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara; Mr. Gh. Nabi Sofi, Ex. AEE, PHE Sub-Division Handwara; Mr. Showkat Jan Dar, JE; and Mr. Showkat Hussain Peer, Ex. JE. The list is not placed on record of this petition. The list is said to have contained the signatures of Mr. Naseer Ahmad Dar, Ex. Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara; Mr. Gh. Nabi Sofi, Ex. AEE, PHE Sub-Division Handwara; Mr. Showkat Jan Dar, JE; and Mr. Showkat Hussain Peer, Ex. JE. The list is not placed on record of this petition. Therefore, it cannot be said whether or not the names of the petitioners figured in the said list; xx. Annexure A-20 is the order of the Court dated 16.04.2012 whereby the writ petition came to be finally disposed of. Annexure A-21 is the order of the Court dated 19.04.2012 rectifying some mistake in the earlier order dated 16.04.2012 passed in the petitioners’ earlier writ petition. 14. It would be apt to mention here that none of the documents, referred to hereinabove, appended by the petitioners with this writ petition of different dates upto the date of disposal of their aforesaid earlier writ petition, except Annexure A-18, establishes the plea of the petitioners that they were engaged or that they were working in PHE Division Handwara as need based labourers. Since the petitioners had filed their earlier writ petition in 2009, which stood disposed of, it was crucial important for them to establish that when they filed the earlier writ petition, there was sufficient evidence available with them, which still subsisted, to demonstrate and establish that they had been engaged, they were working and their names figured in the lists of such workers which had been enclosed with various communications exchanged between the authorities from time to time. They have failed to discharge this burden. To ascertain whether the petitioners had placed any such documentary proof on their earlier writ petition, this Court had sent for the record of that writ petition, being SWP no.2023/2009, vide Court Secretary’s communication dated 07.06.2018 from the Registrar Judicial. It was reported that the record of that writ petition had got damaged in the September 2014 floods. The Registry expressed its helplessness to submit the same. So, the claim has not been established. So far as Annexure A-18 is concerned, as would be seen, it has later been found that the said statement was wrong. Therefore, upto the date of disposal of the petitioners’ earlier writ petition, there is no evidence coming forth to establish the plea of the petitioners; Third period after disposal of the writ petition/post filing of the Contempt petition no. Therefore, upto the date of disposal of the petitioners’ earlier writ petition, there is no evidence coming forth to establish the plea of the petitioners; Third period after disposal of the writ petition/post filing of the Contempt petition no. 161/2013 and post floods of September 2014: xxi. Annexure A-22 is communication no.PHE/LS/3829 dated 15.05.2012 written by Chief Engineer to the Commissioner/Secretary to Government, PHE Department, informing him about the order of the Court passed in SWP no.2023/2009, informing him that the Court had taken cognizance of Annexure ‘K’ thereto which was the committee report, and requesting that the case may be considered in light of the judgment in Hassan Anzulla’s case, as directed by the Court; xxii. Annexure A-23 is communication no.PW/PHEK/31/2012-WP dated 07.06.2012 written by Under Secretary to Government, PHE Department, to the Chief Engineer, requiring him to submit details of the case; xxiii. Annexure A-24 seems to be the minutes of the meeting of high officials of the PHE Department held on 18.03.2013 in the office Chambers of the Chief Engineer convened to discuss three matters, the third being the court case titled Abdul Majid Shah v State of J&K. Though the document is not clearly legible, but it clearly records that the Committee, after detailed discussion, was of the opinion that the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, had not consulted the record available on the issue while he had submitted the report. It was, therefore, decided that he will re-examine the case and submit a detailed report within a week’s time; xxiv. Annexure A-25 is communication no.DSE/HH/Estt./6502-03 dated 29.03.2013, addressed by District Superintending Engineer, Kupwara, to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, requiring him to verify the status of the petitioners in light of letter no.1081 dated 25.08.2010; xxv. It appears that meanwhile the petitioners filed contempt no. 161/2013 alleging disobedience of the order dated 16.04.2012. Annexure A-26 is a communication no.Est/PHE/750-53 dated 05.06.2013 whereunder Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, forwarded list of petitions to the Superintending Engineer, Kupwara; xxvi. It appears that meanwhile the petitioners filed contempt no. 161/2013 alleging disobedience of the order dated 16.04.2012. Annexure A-26 is a communication no.Est/PHE/750-53 dated 05.06.2013 whereunder Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, forwarded list of petitions to the Superintending Engineer, Kupwara; xxvi. Annexure A-27 is a communication no.PW/PHEK/31/2012-WP dated 12.06.2013 written by Under Secretary to Government, PHE Department, to the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir, forwarding to him a copy of DO dated 02.06.2014 (should be 02.06.2013) alongwith its enclosures that had been received from Minister for Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, and requiring him to scrutinize the issues consistent with the documents enclosed with the said DO, and furnish a report; xxvii. Meanwhile, it appears a meeting was also convened in the office chamber of Special Secretary, PHE on 02.07.2013 wherein Executive Engineer, PHE, Handwara, also attended. Annexure A-28, in that connection, is a communication no.Estt/PHE/Hand/160-62 dated 08.07.2013 written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to the District Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, HQ, Handwara. Parts of this communication are extracted below:- “In pursuance to the above cited petition undersigned alongwith the Legal Assistant of Chief Engineer, Kashmir and Legal Assistant of Administrative Department attended to matter. The grounds/factors of the case in detail were discussed in the said meeting. The fact basis clarification has been revealed during the meeting which are reproduced as under: Demand of funds for payment of genuine casual labours need based workers (List is enclosed for reference): It is a fact that in the year 2006-07 the Executive Engineer had demanded arrangement of funds to the Division for payment to genuine casual labours (Need Base) vide his letter No.1550-53 of 11.09.2006 along with the list of genuine casual labourers (Photostat copy enclosed) and followed by the demand by District Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle Kupwara, HQ Handwara vide…Besides it, a representation of casual labours had approached Hon’ble Minister for PHE…This is clearly reveal(ed) that their (sic) had been demand of funds for genuine casual labours (as per enclosed List, but no funds with formal allotment from Chief Engineer had been released. Annexure ‘K’ of Writ petition High Level Committee Report: The Departmental high level committee as per Chief Engineer’s order No.PHE/Est/5768-73 dated 05.06.2007 (Referring Annexure ‘K’ of petition). Annexure ‘K’ of Writ petition High Level Committee Report: The Departmental high level committee as per Chief Engineer’s order No.PHE/Est/5768-73 dated 05.06.2007 (Referring Annexure ‘K’ of petition). The Committee unanimously recommended the case to Chief Engineer for consideration to release the wages by the Executive Engineer in favour of genuine need based workers subject to the conditions. In response to the recommendations of the committee for release of wages by the Executive Engineer in favour of genuine casual labours has been implemented on the conditions laid down by the committee. A. The casual labours declared genuine by the Government whose No. is 236, out of which 144 posted to PHE Division Handwara, 50 posted to PHE Division Kupwara, 38 posted to PHE Mechanical Sopore. The wages as per recommendation has been released after screening through the committee of officers and ascertaining the authenticity of claims of casual labours who have physically and actually worked at various sites; B. The identification and verification of need based workers includes checking of their bona fides such as name, parentage, residence, date of birth, qualification and period worked etc. after thorough identification parade had been conducted by the screening committee comprised of officers/officials under whom these casual labours have worked. C. The services of these need based workers as per the norms and as per the field requirement duly verified by the screening committee has been utilized (only the casual labours who have been declared genuine by the Government). D. The release of wages for pending period to 05.06.2007 has been considered on merits and paid in full to the genuine/deserving casual labours (The action take at that point of time in pursuant to recommendation of the committee has been verified with respect to the documents available in Division Office).” 15. The aforesaid report made by the Executive Engineer is self speaking about the various issues discussed and reported upon therein. It establishes the fact that the Government had declared 236 casual labourers as genuine out of whom 144 had been posted in PHE Division, Handwara, who stood duly verified and identified and were being duly paid pursuant to the recommendations made by the Enquiry Committee in terms of the report placed with the petitioners’ earlier writ petition as annexure ‘K’. Obviously, therefore, the petitioners were not from amongst these 144 genuine labourers in whose favour the Committee had made the recommendation in question. Obviously, therefore, the petitioners were not from amongst these 144 genuine labourers in whose favour the Committee had made the recommendation in question. The above report of the Executive Engineer, PHE, Handwara, thus makes the things clear. It does not advance the case of the petitioners; it, rather, demolishes their case. In the aforesaid communication, the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, also stated that: “In fact, a list of persons fabricated outside by Photostat, ‘Scan Documentation’ is a severe deception activity besides to legitimize the ungenuine case by attributing the official records, verification and report of the committee demand of funds. Annexure ‘k’ for disbanded 210 casual labours and re-engagement of casual labours of 236. The figure data reflected for such casual labours in various official communications have been highjacked in their fabricated lists/petitions. The petitioners have always taken the benefit of figure, thus deceiving the Government and Court of Justice (The affidavit of Casual Labour Need Based Workers who have not been clear by the Committee despite they have been paid upto 03.1992 is enclosed for reference). Further the office has demanded clarification from Assistant Ex. Engineer PHE Sub Division Handwara & Vilgam who are presently working as well as from the Engineering staff who were working at that time. All the officers have categorically refused and reported that such petitioners have neither been engaged nor worked and not paid at all.” 16. It is reiterated that the above report made by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, is clear in its terms, unambiguous and self-explanatory. It does not need any analysis. In any case, it does not lend any support to the petitioners’ plea or case; it, rather, negates their plea and case; xxviii. Annexure A-29 is communication no.PHE-LS-1102-28419-21 dated 16.11.2013 from the Chief Engineer, PHE Kashmir, seeking views on the aforesaid report from the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, viz., the Chairman Verification Committee; xxix. In response Annexure A-30 is a faxed communication, bearing no.DSE/HH/Estt/5167-68 dated 13.01.2014 wherein the Superintending Engineer informed the Chief Engineer that the detailed report was comprehensive and self explanatory, and that the casual labourers who were genuine were working as per norms and as per the field requirement as verified by the screening committee constituted for the purpose. However, he said that the Committee could not authenticate the report about hijacking of office records and fabrication of records. However, he said that the Committee could not authenticate the report about hijacking of office records and fabrication of records. This communication does not establish that the petitioners were verified to be from among the workers who were found to be genuine or were working as per the field requirements; xxx. Annexure A-31 is OM CD no.99/07/2014 dated 04.06.2014 circulated by Under Secretary to Government, GAD, enclosing thereunder Cabinet Decision no.99/07/2014 dated 03.06.2014 regarding regularization of casual/temporary/need based labourers, engaged after 31.01.1994; xxxi. Annexure A-32 is the content of the Cabinet Decision dated 03.06.2014, sent by the Cabinet Secretary to the Principal Secretary & Secretary to the Government, Finance Department and Secretary to Government, GAD. By this Decision, the Cabinet had ordered that, in order to enable its Sub-Committee headed by the Finance Minister to prepare an appropriate policy in regard to regularization of casual/temporary/need based labourers engaged after 31.01.1994, all the Department shall submit the requite details to the Finance Department by the end of June, 2014; xxxii. Annexure A-33 is communication no.PW/PHEK/31/2012-WP dated 12.06.2014 on the subject of “Contempt No.161/2013 in SWP No.2023/2009 titled Abdul Majid Shah & ors. v. State of J&K” written by Under Secretary to Government, PHE Department, to the Chief Engineer, PHE, forwarding to him DO dated 02.06.2014 alongwith its enclosures that had been received from Minister for Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, with request to scrutinize the issue in consistent with the documents enclosed with the said DO, and furnish report; xxxiii. Annexure A-34 is communication no.PW/PHEK/31/2014-WP.dated 01.07.2014 from Under Secretary to Government, PHE to the Chief Engineer, which is a reminder in regard to the above communication; xxxiv. Annexure A-35 is another communication no.PW/PHEK/31/2012-WP dated 28.08.2014 from Under Secretary to Government, PHE, to the Chief Engineer on the same subject and in reference to aforesaid earlier communications, requiring him to pass a speaking order consistent with the orders passed by the Court; xxxv. Annexure A-36 is communication no.PHE/LS/1102/6781 dated 11.10.2014 from the Chief Engineer to the Commissioner Secretary to Government, PHE & I&FC Department, in response to aforesaid letter, Annexure A-35. The Chief Engineer made a detailed report as to the steps taken by the Department in this regard and the reports/findings/recommendations of various Committees. Annexure A-36 is communication no.PHE/LS/1102/6781 dated 11.10.2014 from the Chief Engineer to the Commissioner Secretary to Government, PHE & I&FC Department, in response to aforesaid letter, Annexure A-35. The Chief Engineer made a detailed report as to the steps taken by the Department in this regard and the reports/findings/recommendations of various Committees. In para 10 of the report, referring to the earlier report submitted by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division Handwara, vide letter no.1160-62 dated 18.07.2013, it was mentioned that clarification had been demanded from Assistant Executive Engineer, PHE Sub-Division, Handwara and Vilgam as well as from the Engineering Staff and all the officers had categorically reported that such petitioners had neither been engaged nor had worked and nor had they been paid. In the report, the Chief Engineer also mentioned about the communication Annexure A-18 purported to be from the Executive Engineer to the Deputy Advocate General informing him that the petitioners were working in different schemes. The Chief Engineer in his report stated that the letter being a Xerox copy and furnished by the petitioners with the petition, cannot be taken as authentic and that the Executive Engineer PHE Division Handwara had been asked vide communication no.PHE/LS/1102-10063-66 dated 10.07.2014 to intimate whether the said letter had been issued from the Division and, if so, an authenticated copy be submitted, but the report was awaited; xxxvi. Annexure A-37 is communication no.PW/PHEK/31/2012-WP dated 21.10.2014 written by Under Secretary to Government, PHE, to the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir, in response to the above detailed report, requesting him to proceed in the matter in terms of the findings and suggestions of the Committee, and to file the status report in the Court in the Contempt petition; xxxvii. By Annexure A-38, issued under endorsement no.PHE/LS/1102-19919-24 dated 17.11.2014, the Chief Engineer referred the matter to the committee of officers already constituted by the department under the Chairmanship of the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, with its other members named in the order, to have a physical parade of the petitioners in order to ascertain verification/genuineness of their claim; xxxviii. By Annexure A-38, issued under endorsement no.PHE/LS/1102-19919-24 dated 17.11.2014, the Chief Engineer referred the matter to the committee of officers already constituted by the department under the Chairmanship of the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, with its other members named in the order, to have a physical parade of the petitioners in order to ascertain verification/genuineness of their claim; xxxviii. Annexure A-39 is communication dated 17.01.2015 written by the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, to the Chief Engineer, in response to his aforesaid endorsement dated 17.11.2014, informing him that the Committee constituted a Sub-committee of two AAOs of Handwara and Kupwara, with SO Circle Office and Head Clerk, I&FC Division, Handwara, as its members to ascertain the authenticity of the casual labourers after going through the payments made or to be made to genuine cases. It was reported therein that as the records provided to the Committee were photocopies and could not be relied upon, so it was decided to go through the original records. Accordingly, the concerned Executive Engineer was asked to furnish the original papers which included engagement orders, master sheets, fixed charges register, PWD Cash Books pertaining to the subject matter. The Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, in return vide his no.2389-91 dated 10.01.2015 had reported that none of the records, as had been sought, were available in the Division. As to the PWD Cash Books pertaining to the required period from 2008 to March 2014, it was reported that the same had been taken by the Police Crime Branch in their custody in connection with the investigation of case, FIR no.91/2014. In the report, the Superintending Engineer requested the Chief Engineer to approach the Crime Branch to either check the genuineness of the casual labourers at their own level or to furnish the original documents lying with them relating to the case so that further action could be taken and the case finally decided by the Committee. The Superintending Engineer, in his aforesaid report, further stated as under: “…It is interesting to express that while the case was discussed with the sub-committee and Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, in my office chambers, a letter endorsed by the then Executive Engineer Sh. Mohd Afzal Rather was handed over to the forum and after going through its contents the confusion got integrated due to the following reasons: 1. Mr. Mohd Afzal Rather was handed over to the forum and after going through its contents the confusion got integrated due to the following reasons: 1. Mr. rather has accepted that the payment has been made by him to 227 genuine casual labourers as per strict directions of Hon’ble High Court. This No. has again confused the committee being very less as compared to a total of 322 casual labours (as per writ petition). Further the Photostat copies (unauthenticated) show that the payment has been made by him to these casual labours, which are genuine in his eyes on the methods what are beyond the payment rule. Neither the master sheets have been signed by concerned Assistant Executive Engineers nor advices/imprest has been issued to the concerned casual labours/Assistant Executive Engineers as a rule for this disbursement in their favour. On the contrary the payment has been disbursed through Divisional cashier. It is pertinent to mention here that the same Executive Engineer has vide his no.1160-62 dt. 08.07.2013 denied the physical existence of these casual labours in the Division except one, when he was in chair as Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara (refer also the report submitted by Assistant Executive Engineer, PHE Sub-Division Handwara and PHE sub-Division Vilgam bearing Nos. 148/SDH, dt 17/05/2012 and No.Rrsd/63 dt 17/05/2012 respectively who have stated that no person from the list serial 1 to 322 furnished by the Hon’ble Court is working/existing in their respective Sub-Divisions). The Superintending Engineer, in view of the above, requested the Chief Engineer that the case may be referred either to a third party outside District Kupwara or some reputed and well versed expert in the field of establishment may be appointed to assist (in resolving) the difficult and controversial task. He also requested that Mr. Mohd Afzal Rather, Executive Engineer may be directed to explain and clear his position regarding his contradictory statements and for not observing the codal procedure during the payments. xxxix. Annexure A-40 is the communication dated 10.01.2015 written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara to the Chairman, Sub-Committee, informing him that no records were available with the Division; xl. Mohd Afzal Rather, Executive Engineer may be directed to explain and clear his position regarding his contradictory statements and for not observing the codal procedure during the payments. xxxix. Annexure A-40 is the communication dated 10.01.2015 written by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara to the Chairman, Sub-Committee, informing him that no records were available with the Division; xl. Annexure A-41 is communication no.27938-40 dated 21.02.2015 addressed by the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir to Shri Muhammad Afzal Rather, the then Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Hadwara, requiring him to explain and clear his position as to whether the facts reported by the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circular, Kupwara were correct; xli. Annexure A-42 is the explanation submitted by Shri Muhammad Afzal Rather, the then Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara; xlii. Annexure A-43 is the report made by the Committee to the Chief Engineer under communication no.5916 dated 11.03.2015, inter alia, to the effect that there were mysterious photocopied statements found in the file received from the direction office which showed some sort of disbursement made to the so called need based workers at belated stage when a case was under investigation with the Crime Branch, Srinagar, under FIR no.91 of 2014 regarding huge embezzlement of funds reportedly from almost all heads of accounts viz. capital, salary, depositary funds, wages etc. during the incumbency of the same Executive Engineer, Mr. Mohd Afzal Rather. In this context, the Committee also referred to the letter submitted by AAO, Ghulam Nabi Ahanger, stating that this might have been a fabrication process to cover up the embezzlement case under investigation. The Committee expressed its inability to verify the authenticity of the so called disbursements as all the original cash books of the period had been seized by the Crime Branch, It was also reported that the present AEEs of the Sub-Division, Handwara and Vilgam had in their latest status reports said that no such need based workers were engaged or working in their Sub-Divisions at that time. The Committee further recommended that the then Executive Engineer, Mr. Mohd Afzal Rather, may be made a part in the case before the probing agency; xliii. The Committee further recommended that the then Executive Engineer, Mr. Mohd Afzal Rather, may be made a part in the case before the probing agency; xliii. Annexure A-44 is an order under endorsement no.32693-97 dated 23.03.2015 issued by the Chief Engineer, detailing the relevant facts and quoting the above reports etc, expressing that in light of the facts, it would not be possible for the Department to recommend any final disposal of the case till the outcome of the nuiry being conducted by the Crime Branch; xliv. Annexure A-45 is the order of the Court dated 10.05.2016 passed in Contempt petition no.161/2013 directing the Investigating Officer to provide photocopy of the seized documents to Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, with direction to him to implement the Court judgment in light of the report of the Committee comprising of Superintending Engineer, PHE, Mechanical Circle, North, Srinagar; Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle, Srinagar; Superintendent Engineer, Hyd. Circle, Handwara; Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle, Anantnag, and Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Kupwara; xlv. Annexure A-46 is a communication no.PHE/Estt/676-78 dated 09.06.2016 from Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, to the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, seeking guidance from him in the case as compliance report was to be filed in the Court; xlvi. Annexure A-47 is another communication bearing no.DB/PHE/Hand/694-96 dated 11.06.2016 written by the Executive Engineer to the District Superintending Engineer seeking funds to the tune of Rs.21 lacs to release the wages in favour of the petitioners in pursuance of the orders passed in the contempt proceedings and to submit the compliance report; xlvii. Annexure A-48 the compliance report on behalf of the Executive Engineer submitted before the Court wherein it is stated that to comply the directions a demand of Rs.21.00 lacs had been made to the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir as wages for the month of April & May, 2016 and also to arrange balance wages for the previous period; xlviii. Annexure A-49 is the order of the Court dated 28.06.2016 seeking personal appearance of the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir, before the Court; xlix. Annexure A-49 is the order of the Court dated 28.06.2016 seeking personal appearance of the Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir, before the Court; xlix. Annexure A-50 is the court order dated 30.06.2016 stating that the officer has sought six weeks time to arrange funds for disbursement of the same to the applicants; l. Annexure A-51 is a communication no.PHE/LS/1102… dated 16.07.2016 written by the Chief Engineer to the Secretary to Government, PHE Department, seeking funds to the tune of Rs.21 lacs so that the Court directions were implemented; li. Annexure A-52 is communication no.DB/PHE/Hand/1907-09 dated 29.12.2016 written by Executive Engineer, Handwara, to the District Superintending Engineer, Kupwara, seeking funds to implement the Court direction; lii. Annexure A-53 is yet another communication from the Executive Engineer, Handwara, to the District Superintending Engineer seeking funds to avoid contempt proceedings; liii. Annexure A-54 is the Division Bench order dated 07.02.2017 passed in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL no.16/2014 and connected matters). It appears that the subject matter of the PIL concerned the embezzlement of Government funds in the PHE Division, Handwara. Therein the Government Counsel made a statement that an enquiry was vigorously being conducted by the Director General, Audit and Inspections, J&K and further that the status of the regular inquiry would be submitted before the Court within three weeks. It appears that the PIL Bench had also called for the records of the Contempt no.161/2013 and therein, the Division Bench sought status report and compliance of order dated 10.05.2016; liv. Annexure A-55 is communication no.PHE-LS/36540-43 dated 18.02.2017 addressed by Chief Engineer, PHE, Kashmir, to the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, seeking an explanation from him for projecting a demand in a manner as if other officers have also made demand of funds on the same line. The Chief Engineer asked the Executive Engineer to provide the master sheets of the so engaged persons in order to ascertain the genuineness of his demand; lv. Annexure A-56 is the explanation tendered by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara. It mostly refers to the orders of the Court passed from time to time and, in fact, most of the correspondence that had exchanged from time to time between the officers and the DO letters of the Minister Incharge of the Department; lvi. Annexure A-56 is the explanation tendered by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara. It mostly refers to the orders of the Court passed from time to time and, in fact, most of the correspondence that had exchanged from time to time between the officers and the DO letters of the Minister Incharge of the Department; lvi. Annexure A-57 is communication no.PHE/Hand/Estt/2784-87 dated 09.03.2017 with the same contents as above with the addition of the last para written by the Executive Engineer to the AAG. In the last para, the Executive Engineer stated “the undersigned has only revealed the facts about the case and has kept at the disposal all the relevant records pertaining to the case right from 2006 till date. Before my joining the Division, many Ex. Engineers, SEs and CEs have demanded funds for these casual labourers who (are) fighting for their cause in the Hon’ble High Court. The undersigned has no mala fide intentions and the decision of the Hon’ble High Court will be binding for the all parities.” lvii. Annexure A-58 is the impugned order passed by the Chief Engineer, the operative portion of which has already been quoted above. 17. Before I refer to the findings recorded in the impugned order on the basis of which the Chief Engineer has come to the conclusion contained in the operative part of the order, I would refer to the other annexures A-59 to A-64 appended to the petition; lviii. Annexure A-59 is purported to be the attendance of 234 need based labourers stated to be prepared in light of Court decision from 05.06.2007 to 11/2012 signed by 20 Works Supervisors and ALMs (Assistant Linemen) of some Schemes, and countersigned by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, addressed to Jr. Engineer concerned; lix. Annexure A-60 is a similar statement purported to be attendance of 234 need based labourers stated to be prepared in light of Court decision from 12/2012 to 8/2013 signed by numerous persons, including some Sarpanches of Halqa Pandithpora, Halqa Panchat Magam, Halqa Audoora and Halqa Truch. Curiously, though the attendance is purported to be for the period from 12/2012 to 8/2013, but the signature of one of the Sarpanches, named Bashir Ahmad Mir, Sarpanch Halqa Panchayat Magam bears the date as 01.01.2015; lx. Curiously, though the attendance is purported to be for the period from 12/2012 to 8/2013, but the signature of one of the Sarpanches, named Bashir Ahmad Mir, Sarpanch Halqa Panchayat Magam bears the date as 01.01.2015; lx. Annexure A-61 is again a similar attendance purported to be from 9/2013 to 11/2014 signed by same persons and bearing the same date, viz. 01.01.2015, under the signature of one of the Sarpanches, named Bashir Ahmad Mir, Sarpanch Halqa Panchayat Magam. However, this time ten more handwritten pages containing the names of 5+5 +4+2+6+4+11+5+10+11 = 63 more persons have been added which bear the signatures and stamps of numerous Sarpanches or Deputy Sarpanches. It is not understandable how were Sarpanches concerned with marking of attendance of any labourer; lxi. Annexure A-62 is an order issued by Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, under endorsement no.2054-60 dated 10.05.2013 containing the names of 95 persons purported to be the list of need based casual workers for proper utilization of their services. The last para of this order contains a Note to the following effect: “Note:- The aforesaid Need Based Casual Labourers engaged by the PHE Authorities from time to time prior to June 2007. However on account payments stands already paid by the Division to Need Based/Casual Labours from overall savings of the budget allocation from January 2013 upto 10/2013. Balance pending payment could be paid as and when demanding funds are available in the Division which may be noted in feature (sic).” It is curious to notice that on the overleaf of the first page of this order dated 10.05.2013 is a handwritten note bearing endorsement no.438-40 dated 20.05.2016 at its top, addressed to AEE Handwara/Vilgam to the following effect: “In compliance to the series of judgments of Hon’ble High Court Srinagar vide order No.1224 of 2012 and 10th May 2016 including the continuance of contempt order no.161/2013, you are directed to utilize the service of need base casual labours/petitioners as per the present requirement in persuation to the enclosed order in the interest of the department with immediate effect. However, their service/labour also be utilized during the natural climates (sick), flood damages, frost burst, cloud burst, Head works, erosions or during slides in hilly areas, stacking of departmental store at Divisional Store. To ensure considerable economy of the execution of schemes/works maintenance of the schemes and survey works. For strict compliance.” 18. However, their service/labour also be utilized during the natural climates (sick), flood damages, frost burst, cloud burst, Head works, erosions or during slides in hilly areas, stacking of departmental store at Divisional Store. To ensure considerable economy of the execution of schemes/works maintenance of the schemes and survey works. For strict compliance.” 18. Obviously, these statements have been prepared much after the period they are supposed to pertain; so the element of fabrication is writ large on the face of these documents. lxii. Annexure A-63 is a similar order issued under endorsement no.2061-70 dated 10.05.2013 regarding 132 other persons with the same note, as quoted above, appended to it at the end; lxiii. Annexure A-64 is a handwritten marginal note akin to the one written overleaf of first page of Annexure A-62, as quoted above, but this time on a separate paper by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara. It is worthy of notice that that order contained in Annexure A-63 bears the endorsement date 10.05.2013, whereas the above marginal note relating thereto bears no. 626-29 and date 06.06.2016 at its top. This casts a serious doubt about the genuineness of the above two annexures viz. Annexure A-62 and A-63; 19. Now, coming to the grounds taken by the petitioners in their writ petition against the impugned order, it is their specific case that respondent no.3 has passed the impugned order simply on the basis of the communication dated 08.07.2013 of the then Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara and the report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, dated 07.10.2015, whereas he has not taken into account: (i) his own communication dated 11.10.2014; (ii) consideration orders dated 14.11.2014, 07.01.2015, 11.03.2015 and 23.03.2015; (iii) communication dated 11.06.2016; (iv) compliance report submitted on behalf of the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara in respect to the order of the Court dated 10.05.2016; (v) communication dated 16.07.2016 of the Chief Engineer; (vi) communications dated 16.01.2017, 28.02.2017 and 29.03.2017 addressed by respondent no.5 to AAG. Before adverting to the aforesaid documents, it would be appropriate, at this stage, to refer to the findings on the relevant points recorded in the impugned order. Before adverting to the aforesaid documents, it would be appropriate, at this stage, to refer to the findings on the relevant points recorded in the impugned order. These are as under: (a) That the Committee of officers constituted by the Chief Engineer vide his office order issued under endorsement no.PHE/Estt/5768-73 dated 05.06.2007 had recommended release of wages by the Executive Engineer in favour of genuine need based workers subject to the conditions laid down by the Committee, which included screening through the committee of officers, identification and verification of the need based workers; (b) That when the Chief Engineer vide his office letter No.PHE-LS-8652-53 dated 06.07.2012 sought full details of the case from the Superintending Engineer, Hydraulic Circle, Kupwara, and Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, the Executive Engineer, vide his communication no.Estt/PHE/Hand/1160-62 dated 08.07.2013, informed the Chief Engineer as under: (i) that all the genuine workers were being paid wages as per recommendation of the committee after conducting their identification and verification; (ii) that the total number of casual workers declared genuine by the Government were 236 in all, out of whom 144 were posted in PHE Division, Handwara; (iii) that the above action taken pursuant to the recommendations of the Committee had been verified with the documents available in the Division Office; (iv) that lists of persons and documents had been fabricated outside by photostat and scan documentation attributing the same to be official records to legitimize the in-genuine cases; (v) that clarifications were demanded from Assistant Executive Engineers, PHE Sub-Division, Handwara, & Vilgam and the Engineering staff working at the relevant time and that they categorically reported that such petitioners had neither been engaged nor had they worked. They had also not been paid. (c) That no demand for release of any wages had been made by any Superintending Engineer/Executive Engineer of District Kupwara from 2012 to 2015; (d) That the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, who had made a lot of correspondence with higher authorities on the subject and had intimated that only one of the petitioners was working, all of a sudden, released wages in favour of 227 out of 322 petitioners which was suspicious, though no funds in that regard had been released by the direction office; (e) That the aforesaid imaginary casual labourers had been paid wages by the Ex. Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, out of the amount meant for execution of works, and he could not provide the corresponding progress of the work; (f) That the action of release of the aforesaid payments to the 227 imaginary casual labourers by the Ex. Executive Engineer, Handwara, was under investigation of the Crime Branch in FIR no.91/2014; (g) That as per letter no.CBK-Dy.SP-P-15-12108 dated 07.10.2015 of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Kashmir, the investigation conducted had revealed that the accused Executive Engineer in league with his accused cashier, I/C Establishment Bashir Ahad Dar, Manzoor Ahmad Hajam, Establishment Clerk and Union President Ab. Rehman Shah had fabricated false documents in order to account for the embezzled amount of Rs.1,68,44,058. It was also reported that the investigation further revealed that the accused had fabricated false attendance of the so called need based workers showing the same to be signed by some Assistant Linemen and JEs, but they in their statements recorded under section 161 and 164-A Cr. P. C. categorically denied to have given attendance to said so called need based workers. It would be appropriate to reproduce hereunder the investigation report that had been sent to the Chief Engineer by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, in this regard which has, in fact, been quoted in the impugned order. It reads “The investigation conducted has also revealed that the accused Executive Engineer in league with his accused cashier, I/C Establishment Bashir Ahmad Dar, Manzoor Ahmad Hajam Establishment Clerk and Union President Ab Rehman Shah have fabricated false documents in order to accommodate the embezzled amount of Rs.1,68,44,058/- shown above. In this regard the investigation conducted has revealed that the occurrence has taken place from January 2013 to October 2013 and during this period the above mentioned amount was drawn in the name of official accused persons and non-officials accused persons. The case was registered in April 2014 at P/S Handwara and subsequently transferred to Crime Branch Kashmir in the month of August 2014 and in the first week of September 2014 there was devastating flood in the Valley. The case was registered in April 2014 at P/S Handwara and subsequently transferred to Crime Branch Kashmir in the month of August 2014 and in the first week of September 2014 there was devastating flood in the Valley. The accused felt that the records got damaged and they will escape from the guilt but when Crime Branch started acting against upon the said case, the above named accused persons in the month of December 2014 fabricated false Acquittance Roll of so called Need Based Workers regarding whom there was case sub-judice in the Hon’ble High Court of J&K titled Ab. Majeed Shah versus State & others. The Executive Engineer along with the other accused persons mentioned above have shown disbursed embezzled amount of Rs.1,50,11,927/- among them in cash. But he himself intimates to his senior officers vide his communication nos. ACCT-PHE-Hand-759-62 dated 18.05.2012 and Estt-PHE-Hand-1160-62 dated 08.07.2013 that petitioners (so called need base(d) workers) have neither been engaged nor worked and nor paid at all after seeking reports from his sub Divisional Officer. Moreover the accused Establishment and Establishment Clerk named above have presented affidavits duly attested by the Judicial Magistrate Handwara in which they have admitted to have fabricated these documents on the direction of the accused Executive Engineer. In addition some of the so called need based workers were examined and they in their statements revealed that they have not received any payment and their signatures on the Acquittance Roll/affidavits were taken by deceitful means by the accused persons. The investigation conducted has revealed that the accused Executive Engineer and his Cashier has fabricated false attendance of the so called need based workers, showing it signed by some Assistant Linemen and JEs, but they in their statements recorded in terms of section 161 and 164-A Cr. P. C. categorically denied to have given attendance to said so called need based workers. The investigation conducted has also revealed that the accused Cashier while replying to an explanation called by the then Executive Engineer vide his no.Acctts/PHE-Hand/158-60 dated 19.04.2014 had himself replied that he has not maintained any civil Cash Book. Moreover, in the fabricated Acquittance roll the accused Executive Engineer and his cashier have shown disbursed the amount in presence of Assistant Lineman Ab. Majeed Mir, Gh. Rasool Dar and Ab. Moreover, in the fabricated Acquittance roll the accused Executive Engineer and his cashier have shown disbursed the amount in presence of Assistant Lineman Ab. Majeed Mir, Gh. Rasool Dar and Ab. Rehman Shah, but all the 03 persons in their affidavits and statements have denied to have witnessed the disbursement.” (h) In the impugned order, the Chief Engineer also recorded that the demand of Rs.21 (twenty one) lacs was made by the present Executive Engineer of PHE Division Handwara, being unaware of the letter No.1160-62 dated 08.07.2013 and Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Kashmir’s letter No.CBK/DySP(P)/15/12108 dated 07.10.2015, and that he had demanded the amount without proper application of mind as wages to the petitioners vide his letter No.694-96 dated 11.06.2016 for which an explanation was called and the Executive Engineer was directed to produce the Muster Sheets of the petitioners for whom the demand had been made, but the concerned Executive Engineer failed to produce the Muster Sheets of the petitioners. 20. Though the above report on the investigation of the case is clear in its terms and should supply a quietus to the matter, yet, adverting to the communications relied upon by the petitioners, as referred to in para 19 above, it may be observed that in his communication dated 11.10.2014 the Chief Engineer, while referring to the reports/findings/recommendations of various Committees, has clearly written to the Commissioner Secretary to Government, PHE & I&FC Department, that clarification had been demanded from Assistant Executive Engineer, PHE Sub-Division, Handwara and Vilgam as well as from the Engineering Staff, and that all the officers had categorically stated that such petitioners had neither been engaged nor had worked, and had had not been paid. In the report, the Chief Engineer also mentioned about the communication Annexure A-18 purported to be from the Executive Engineer to the Deputy Advocate General informing him that the petitioners were working in different schemes. The Chief Engineer in his communication under reference stated that the letter being a Xerox copy and furnished by the petitioners with the petition, could not be taken as authentic and that the Executive Engineer, PHE Division Handwara, had been asked to intimate whether the said letter had been issued from the Division and, if so, an authenticated copy be submitted, but the report was awaited. So this communication does not help the petitioners. 21. So this communication does not help the petitioners. 21. As to the consideration orders dated 14.11.2014, 07.01.2015, 11.03.2015 and 23.03.2015, relied upon by the petitioners, it may be mentioned that there is no consideration order dated 14.11.2014 or 07.01.2015 on record. Communication dated 11.03.2015, clearly talks about fabrication of documents and mysterious payments made by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara. Order dated 23.03.2015 issued by the Chief Engineer, detailing the relevant facts and quoting the earlier reports clearly expresses the view that it would not be possible for the Department to recommend any final disposal of the case till the outcome of the enquiry being conducted by the Crime Branch. So there is nothing in these documents as would alter the findings and result of the consideration accorded by the Chief Engineer in terms of the impugned order. 22. So far as the communication bearing no.DB/PHE/Hand/694-96 dated 11.06.2016 written by the Executive Engineer to the District Superintending Engineer seeking funds to the tune of Rs.21 lacs to release the wages in favour of the petitioners is concerned, it has been duly taken into account and consideration by the Chief Engineer while passing the impugned order, and it is clearly stated that the demand of Rs.21 (twenty one) lacs was made by the present Executive Engineer of PHE Division, Handwara, on account of his being unaware of the letter no.1160-62 dated 08.07.2013 and Deputy Superintendent of Police Crime Branch, Kashmir’s letter No.CBK/DySP(P)/15/12108 dated 07.10.2015. The plea has been taken for the sake of it. 23. As regards the Court order dated 10.05.2016 passed in Contempt petition no.161/2013, it directed the Investigating Officer to provide photocopy of the seized documents to Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, with direction to him to implement the Court judgment in light of the report of the Committee comprising of Superintending Engineer, PHE, Mechanical Circle, North, Srinagar; Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle, Srinagar; Superintendent Engineer, Hyd. Circle, Handwara; Superintending Engineer, Hyd. Circle, Anantnag, and Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Kupwara. It would suffice to say that the said committee had reported that the Executive Engineer had failed to furnish the information/documents called for from him and that in view of non-availability of records, which had to be produced by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division Handwara, the Committee could not scrutinize the authenticity of the list of these workers. It would suffice to say that the said committee had reported that the Executive Engineer had failed to furnish the information/documents called for from him and that in view of non-availability of records, which had to be produced by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division Handwara, the Committee could not scrutinize the authenticity of the list of these workers. The Committee also noticed that the Administrative Department, vide Government order no.264 of 2007 dated 31.08.2007, had already constituted a committee of the officers mentioned in the report for each PHE Division in the State to verify the authenticity of all the need based workers/casual labourers and, as such, it was the domain of the said Committee to verify the particulars and authenticity of the need based workers. Notwithstanding that, the Committee recommended release of payment only vis-à-vis the genuine need based workers subject to the conditions mentioned in the report, which included identification verification and authenticity of such workers individually. The report made by such Committee has been, in fact, duly referred to and quoted in the impugned order alongwith the conditions stipulated therein. It is not that the Chief Engineer was oblivious of this report or the recommendation made therein, or that the Chief Engineer did not consider the same. The recommendation of the Committee stood implemented vis-à-vis the genuine need based workers. The Court order dated 10.05.2016 has to be read together with the order dated 16.04.2016 passed in the main petition which in para 3 clearly mentioned that the report recommended release of wages to be considered on its merits only after the genuineness of the pending claims were got verified by the Departmental Committee constituted by the Administrative Department for this purpose. And the Court directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for release of their legally earned wages. The words used by the Court in the direction are “legally earned wages”; meaning thereby it had to be ascertained by the respondents whether the petitioners were actually engaged and were actually working. It hardly needs a mention here that a person can be said to have legally earned wages only if he is lawfully engaged and actually performs the work for which he is engaged in lieu whereof he can legally earn wages. It hardly needs a mention here that a person can be said to have legally earned wages only if he is lawfully engaged and actually performs the work for which he is engaged in lieu whereof he can legally earn wages. In that view, the order dated 10.05.2016 passed by the Court in Contempt petition no.161/2013 cannot be read in isolation of the order dated 16.04.2012. It may also be mentioned here that in the impugned order it has clearly been mentioned at page 2 thereof in sub-para (a) that the Government had declared only 236 casual labourers genuine out of whom 144 were posted to PHE Division, Handwara. It is not the case of the petitioners that they fall within these 144 labourers. In any case, the order dated 10.05.2016 does not establish their case of having been engaged as need based labourers or that they had been working as such. Consequently, it would not impact the findings of the Chief Engineer recorded in the impugned order and the conclusion arrived at by him. 24. So far as communication dated 16.07.2016 written by the Chief Engineer to the Government is concerned, it mentions that he was personally called in the contempt proceedings before the Court on 30.06.2016 and that the Court had granted him six weeks time to arrange the funds to the tune of Rs.21 lacs demanded by the Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, vide his letter no.694-96 dated 11.06.2016. It is in that context, with a view to implementing the aforesaid Court direction, that the Chief Engineer had written the communication. Such communication would not bind the Chief Engineer and debar him from going to the root of the mater and finding an answer to the real question whether the petitioners had been engaged and were actually working, moreso in view of the fact that the Court in its order dated 16.04.2012, while disposing of the petitioners’ earlier writ petition, had not returned a finding in that regard. In any case, the report on the investigation of the matter has removed earth underneath all the documents initiated or written by the accused Executive Engineer, PHE Division, Handwara, on the subject, including the communication no.694-96 dated 11.06.2016 and the communications dated 16.01.2017, 28.02.2017 and 29.03.2017 together with the so called attendance certificates from 05.06.2007 to 11/2012; 12/2012 to 08/2013 and from 09/2013 to 11/2014, which have been found to be fabricated to account for the embezzled amount of Rs.1,68,44,058. 25. In light of the above, the petitioners have failed to establish their case. Consequently, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and I am convinced that none of their rights have been violated or infringed by the impugned order. The writ petition therefore, merits dismissal and is so hereby dismissed together with the connected MP(s). 26. Since the Court order dated 16.04.2012 passed in the main writ petition stands implemented in as much as the Chief Engineer in consideration of the case of the petitioners pursuant to the said Court order has passed the impugned order, the contempt petition no. 161/2013 is dismissed. 27. No order as to costs. 28. While parting with this file, the Court expresses the hope that apart from vigorously pursuing the case with the Crime Branch, if it still continues to be under investigation, the competent authority amongst the respondents will proceed departmentally against the official culprits who have fabricated the documents and embezzled Government funds, and ensure that the departmental proceedings are brought to a logical end. In order to ensure that the respondents do not show any slackness in this regard, Registry shall send an attested copy of this judgment to the Chief Secretary and it is expected of him to require and persuade the concerned respondent(s) to take necessary follow up action in the matter so that guilty are brought to justice.