M/S Sai Info Services, v. Shri Ajeet Vasant

Chhattisgarh HC2 Sept 2025CONT/1023/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court contempt disposal; compliance with writ directions for payment of supply bills for Desktop Computers under Samagra Shiksha (Korba); representation filed 11.07.2024 and decided 22.08.2024; balance Rs. 1,64,29,244/- paid via RTGS on 01.09.2025 after TDS; interest claim under para-10.2 of writ relief clause left unresolved; liberty reserved to petitioner; exemption from personal appearance of respondent-1 Collector granted (IA-4/2025); Judge Ravindra Kumar Agrawal; decision dated 03.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to redress his further grievance (including the claim for interest), if so advised; IA-4 of 2025 allowed exempting respondent-1's personal appearance for the day. ¶¶46

M/S Sai Info Services, Vs Shri Ajeet Vasant — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents complied with the direction in the order under contempt (Coordinate Bench) to decide the petitioner's representation and disburse the undisputed claim, given the petitioner's grievance that the interest claimed in para-10.2 of the writ petition's relief clause remains unpaid despite the representation of 11.07.2024 and its decision on 22.08.2024. +1 more

¶¶22

Court's answer

Since the representation of the petitioner had been decided on 22.08.2024 and the undisputed amount had been released in favour of the petitioner, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the contempt petition, expressly reserving liberty to the petitioner to redress any further grievance (including the unpaid interest claim), if so advised.

¶¶45

Ratio / Principle

IA-4 of 2025 was allowed and the personal appearance of respondent-1 (referred to as Contemnor) was exempted for that day's hearing.

¶¶21

Key takeaways

The contempt petition was ordered to stand disposed of on the basis that the representation had been decided and the undisputed amount released; the Court did not itself adjudicate the interest claim.ratio¶¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur — Contempt petition (CONT No. 1023 of 2024) by M/s Sai Info Services against the Collector, Korba (respondent-1) and the District Programme Officer, Samagra Shiksha (respondent-2), alleging non-compliance with the Coordinate Bench order (order under contempt) passed in WPC No. 3134 of 2024, which had directed that the petitioner's fresh representation be decided within 45 days and the undisputed claim for supply of Desktop Computers (supplied April 2023) be disbursed. The representation was made on 11.07.2024 and decided on 22.08.2024; pursuant to the order dated 30.04.2025 and by letter dated 01.09.2025, the remaining balance and final amount of Rs.1,64,29,244/- was released and paid through RTGS after TDS deduction. The petitioner's contention that interest claimed in para-10.2 of the writ petition's relief clause remained unpaid was noted but not adjudicated. IA-4 of 2025 seeking exemption from personal appearance of respondent-1 was allowed for the day, and the contempt petition was disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to pursue the interest/further claim, if so advised.

¶1

Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.09.12 15:57:24 +0530

¶2

2025:CGHC:45029

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CONT No. 1023 of 2024

¶6

M/s Sai Info Services, Through Its Properitor B. Koteswar Rao Age About 36 Years S/o Shri Ram Babu Naik Situated At- House No. 14 Phase I Shiva Residency Mathpurena Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s)

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - Shri Ajeet Vasant, Collector Korba District - Korba (C.G.)

¶9

2 - Shri Manoj Pandey District Program Officer Samagra Shiksha School Education Department Korba District - Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent(s)

¶10

(Cause title is taken from the CIS)

¶11

---------------------------------------- For Petitioner	-------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Shri Rajat Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondent-1	: Shri HS Ahluwalia, Advocate
For Respondent-2	: Ms Seema Verma, Advocate

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

03.09.2025

¶15

Pursuant to order dated 28.08.2025, respondent-2, Contemnor is present in person before this Court.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for respondent-1 would submit that he has made an application IA-4 of 2025, for grant of exemption from personal appearance of respondent-1. He would submit that in view of order dated 30.04.2025, the remaining amount of Rs.1,64,29,244/- has been paid through RTGS to the petitioner, after deducting the TDS, and since the order has been

¶17

Cont 1023 of 2024

¶18

¶19

complied with, and remaining amount has been paid to the petitioner, he made his application for exemption from personal appearance.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not dispute that the said amount has been paid on 01.09.2025 through RTGS to the petitioner.

¶21

In view of above, IA-4 of 2025 is allowed, and the personal appearance of respondent-1, Contemnor is exempted for his appearance for today.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the aforesaid amount has been paid to the petitioner, yet, the claim of the petitioner for grant of interest as claimed in para-10.2 of the relief clause of the writ petition has not been paid to the petitioner. He made representation on 11.07.2024, in which he claimed for interest also, but the interest has not been calculated, and has not been paid by deciding the representation on 22.08.2024, which is clear violation of the direction given by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 26.06.2025, which is the order under contempt.

¶23

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent-1 would submit that the authorities have decided the representation of the petitioner on 11.07.2024 by passing an order on 22.08.2024, and as per the undisputed claim, as mentioned in the order dated 30.04.2025, has been paid to the petitioner, and his representation has also been decided, and thereby, the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this court, which is order under Contempt is duly complied with. He would further submits that if the petitioner is having any other grievance, including the interest part of the claim, he may have redress his grievance by filing an appropriate proceeding, and therefore, in view of the fact that the representation of the petitioner has been decided on 22.08.2024,

¶24

Cont 1023 of 2024

¶25

¶26

and undisputed amount has been paid to him, present petition may be disposed of.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the material annexed with the petition.

¶28

Considering para-7 of the order under contempt, it is relevant to be reproduced herein, for ready reference:

¶29

“7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, ground raised in the writ petition, as also submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the Desktop Computers have been supplied by the petitioner in the month of April 2023, and amount is to be disbursed within 20 days from the date of receipt of articles under the supply order, without commenting anything on merits of claim of the petitioner, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation before respondent No.2 as also respondent No.3 who is also holding the ex-officio post of Mission Director, Samagra Shiksha and if such representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned authority in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 45 days from the date of receipt of representation and thereafter to disburse the undisputed claim raised by the petitioner.”

¶30

From perusal of para-7 of the impugned order, it transpires that the Coordinate Bench of this Court has directed the petitioner as to move fresh representation to respondents-2 and 3, who shall decide the representation within 45 days from the date of its receipt, and thereafter, disburse the

¶31

Cont 1023 of 2024

¶32

¶33

undisputed claim, raised by the petitioner. In compliance of the order dated 26.06.2024, made his representation on 11.07.2024, and thereafter, on 22.08.2024, it has been decided by the authorities. While deciding the representation, following has been observed:

¶34

“ vkids }kjk izLrqr vkosnu vuqlkj 24 fo|ky;ksa esa izfr fo|ky; 20 ux dEI;wVj ,oa 03 ux fizVaj vkiwfrZ dh xbZ gS rFkk 11 fo|kyk;ksa esa izfr fo|ky; 03 ux fizVaj vkiwfrZ dk dk;Z fd;k x;k gSA ftlesa izFke fdLr dh jkf’k 40 izfr’kr iwoZ esa fu;ekuqlkj VhMh,l dVkSrh mijkar vkidksa Hkqxrku dj nh xbZ gSA

¶35

vkids }kjk ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; fcykliqj esa wpc NO. 3134 of 2024 }kjk dafMdk dz- 01 ,oa 02 esa mYysf[kr lkefxz;ksa dh vkiwfrZ mijkar ’ks"k cdk;k jkf’k dh ekax dh xbZ gSA mDr dk;Z ds laca/k esa ys[k gS fd dk;kZy; dysDVj ,oa ftyk n.Mkf/kdkjh dksjck N-x- ds vkns’k dzekad@145@LVsuksa @lh,lvkj@ 2023 dksjck fnukad 14-02-2023 }kjk dksjck ftys esa lapkfyr 42 uohu mRd"V uohu Lokeh vkRekuan fo|ky;ksa esa vko’;d vU; lqfo/kk,¡ fodflr djus dk dk;Z gsrq ,lbZlh,y xsojk {ks= ds lh,lvkj en vraxZr Lohdfr ds izR;k’kk esa ftyk f’k{kk vf/kdkjh dksjck }kjk uohu Lokeh vkRekuan mRd"V fo|ky;ksa esa fofHkUu lkexzh vkiwfrZ gsrq ftyk fe’ku leUo;d lexz f’k{kk jktho xak/kh f’k{kk fe’ku dksjck N-x- dks fdz;kUo;u ,tsalh fu;qDr dj vkns’k tkjh fd;k x;k gS A ftlesa mYysf[kr ’krksZ dh dafMdk dz- 01 vuqlkj ;g iz’kkldh; Lohdfr vkns’k ,lbZlh,y }kjk lh,lvkj en ls Lohdfr dh izR;k’kk esa tkjh fd;k tk jgk gSA dafMdk dz- 03 vuqlkj Lohdfr jkf’k dks rhu fdLrksa esa

¶36

Cont 1023 of 2024

¶37

¶38

miyC/k djk;k tkosxk fdLrokj mi;ksfxrk izek.k i= izLrqr djus ds mijkar gh vkxkeh fdLr miyC/k djk;h tkosxhA dafMdk dz- 13 vuqlkj dk;Z LFky dk QksVksxzkil ds lkFk dk;Z izkajHk djus dh lwpuk nsosaA mijksDrkuqlkj Kkr gks fd uohu Lokeh vkRekuan fo|ky;ksa esa fd;s x;s lkexzh vkiwfrZ ds dk;Z gsrq izFke fdLr dh jkf’k 40 izfr’kr Mh,e,Q en }kjk lh,lvkj en ls Lohdfr dh izR;k’kk esa tkjh fd;k x;k FkkA ftldk vkidks lkexzh vkiwfrZ mijkar izLrqr ns;d ds vk/kkj ij VhMh,l dVkSrh mijkar Hkqxrku dj fn;k x;k gSA orZeku esa dk;kZy; dysDVj ,oa ftyk n.Mkf/ksadkjh dksjck ds i= dzekad@195@LVsuksa@dksjck fnukad 06-03-2024 }kjk ftys es lapkfyr 05 Lokeh vkRekuan fo|ky; dqleq.Mk] nhidk] jatuk] fNUniqj ,oa frojrkds fy, lh,lvkj en ls lkexzh vkiwfrZ gsrq f}rh; fdLr dh 40 izfr’kr jkf’k tkjh dh xbZ gS ftldk ijh{k.k mijkar Hkqxrku dh dk;Zokgh dh tk jgh gS‘’ks"k fo|ky;ks **a** gsrq lkexzh vkiwfrZ ds fy, ,lbZlh,y lh,lvkj en ls Lohdfr ,oa jkf’k tkjh ugh dh xbZ gS ftlds dkj.k Hkqxrku yafcr gSA dk;kZy; dysDVj ,oa ftyk n.Mkf/kdkjh ftyk&dksjck N-x- ds i= dzekad@700@LVsuk s a@ 2024 dksjck fnukad 09-08-2024 }kjk egkizca/kd ,lbZlh,y xsojk {ks= dksjck N-x- dks uohu Lokeh vkRekuan mRd"V fgUnh ek/;e fo|ky;ksa esa जी�र्णो�द्धा�र ,oa vU; lqfo/kk fodflr djus gsrq yafcr Lohdfr ,oa ’ks"k jkf’k tkjh djus gsrq i= izsf"kr fd;k x;k gSA

¶39

vr% ,lbZlh,y lh,lvkj en ls iz’kkldh; Lohd`fr jkf’k izkIr gksus ij Hkqxrku dh dk;Zokgh dh tkosxhA”

¶40

Cont 1023 of 2024

¶41

¶42

Today, on 03.09.2025, respondent-1, Contemnor has made his application IA-4 of 2025, and in para-3 of his application, it has been mentioned that the remaining balance and final amount of Rs.1,64,29,244/- has been released, and paid to the petitioner through RTGS.

¶43

Para-3 of the IA-4 of 2025 of respondent-1 is reproduced here below:

¶44

“3. It is respectfully submitted on 01.09.2025 after deducting TDS the remaining balance and final amount of Rs.1,64,29,244/- has been released and paid to the petitioner through RTGS which is evident from letter dated 01.09.2025 annexed herewith as Annexure A/1 ”

¶45

Considering the above said circumstances, since the representation of the petitioner has been decided on 22.08.2024, and the undisputed amount has been released in favour of the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to redress his grievance with respect to further claim, if any, and if so advised.

¶46

With the aforesaid observation, present contempt petition stands disposed of.

¶47

Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE

¶48

padma

M/S Sai Info Services, v. Shri Ajeet Vasant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sai Info Services, v. Shri Ajeet Vasant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmal Kumar Vishwakarma Vs Siddharth Komal Pardeshi

Chandra Prabha Yadav Vs Siddharth Komal Pardeshi

Ramesh Kumar Sharma Vs Secl

Rohit Bhalla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bal Krishna Sahu Vs Shala Nigar