IN RE: C/S WINDOW INSTALLERS (2003)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered on or about February 8, 2002, which denied petitioner subcontractor's application to annul respondent New York City Department of Design and Construction's directive to respondents contractors to reject petitioner's bids on subcontracting work, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 Assuming that respondent DDC's disapproval of petitioner subcontractor amounts to a governmentally imposed stigma restricting petitioner's ability to seek and obtain employment, and therefore implicates petitioner's liberty interest (see Quinn v. Syracuse Model Neighborhood Corp., 613 F.2d 438, 446 [2nd Cir.]), no due process violation occurred since an adequate post-deprivation opportunity to be heard has been provided by this article 78 proceeding (see Hellenic Am. Neighborhood Action Comm. v. City of New York, 101 F.3d 877, 880-881 [2nd Cir.], cert. dismissed 521 U.S. 1140, 118 S.Ct. 15, 138 L.Ed.2d 1048;  see also Eastway Constr. Corp. v. City of New York, 762 F.2d 243, 250 [2nd Cir.]).   DDC's disapproval of petitioner was rationally based on petitioner's associations with a non-responsible contractor and with an individual who was convicted of mail fraud and involved with another firm that went out of business with outstanding judgments against it.   We note that the rules of the City's Procurement Policy Board apply to contractors, not subcontractors (see 9 RCNY 2-08[a][2]), and that under DDC's contracts with respondents contractors, the contractors' selection of subcontractors is subject to DDC's approval.