The Business Owners Forum has objected to the United Colony Council’s mobilisation against it, questioning the legal basis of proposed restrictions on voluntary business associations.
DIMAPUR — The Business Owners Forum (BOF), a voluntary association representing business owners and shopkeepers, has objected to the recent mobilisation by the United Colony Council (UCC) of Ward-20, Dimapur, against the association.
In a statement issued by its media cell, the BOF alleged that the UCC had brought five neighbouring colony councils into the matter under the banner of the Joint Council Forum (JCF) in an attempt to justify what it described as an “arbitrary and unconstitutional ban” on the association.
The BOF maintained that the number of councils supporting the move could not confer statutory authority to restrict the rights of a voluntary association. It asserted that business owners and shopkeepers have a constitutional right to form voluntary associations under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India.
The forum further argued that while Article 371A provides constitutional protection to traditional indigenous institutions and customary practices in Nagaland, such provisions, in its view, cannot be invoked to restrict the civil liberties of individuals through modern urban residential committees.
The BOF alleged that the mobilisation of multiple colony councils amounted to “horizontal coercion” and placed independent shopkeepers under pressure.
Related: Six Dimapur colony councils oppose ‘Business Owners Forum’
It said it remained peaceful and law-abiding and was open to legitimate dialogue concerning civic welfare in the respective colonies.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Kaushal Kishore v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2023), the BOF claimed that fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21 can, in certain circumstances, be enforced against private individuals and non-state actors. It also cited judicial decisions concerning collective boycotts and associations in support of its position.
The forum said it had already submitted a representation to the deputy commissioner of Dimapur on September 10, seeking executive intervention against what it described as arbitrary restrictions, institutional intimidation, forced closures and lease cancellations affecting its members.
The BOF said it had no intention of engaging in a contest over the number of councils supporting or opposing its position, stating that the central issue was whether the proposed restrictions had legal and statutory backing.
It reiterated that it would continue to engage in dialogue on legitimate civic issues but would oppose any attempt to restrict voluntary business associations without what it considers lawful constitutional and statutory authority.