Disposed¶29

Parmeshwar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC20 Jul 2025WPC/3784/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Aadhaar Centre operator; In-House Model; office memorandum dated 12th January 2023; security deposit Rs 1,50,000 by demand draft; E-Governance Society Rajnandgaon; Upper Collector letter dated 23.06.2025 (Annexure P-7) threatening rejection of application; extension of time till 04.08.2025; reasonable time/no prescribed time period; writ petition disposed of; High Court of Chhattisgarh; Justice Arvind Kumar Verma; neutral citation 2025:CGHC:34391.

What did the court decide?

Extension of time till 04.08.2025 for the petitioner to deposit the demand draft of Rs. 1,50,000/-; failing which the respondent authorities may proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. ¶29

Parmeshwar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:34391

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 3784 of 2025

¶6

Parmeshwar Sahu S/o Chandra Kumar Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Musrakhurd, Dist- Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1- State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Information Technology, Electronics And Communication, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2- State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Headquarter, 5q5w And Pqm, Sector 19, Kotara Bhanata, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Collector Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶12

4 - Upper Collector Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶13

5 - Office Of District E-Governance Society Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶14

6 - Unique Identification Authority Of India (Uidai) Represented By Its Chief Executive Officer Ceo Office At 3rd Floor Tower Ii Jeevan Bharti Building, Cannaught Circus, New Delhi

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Advocate For Respondent -State : Mrs. Akanksha Verma Dabhadker, Panel Lawyer For Respondent no. 6 : Mr.Rishbh Dev Singh, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI

¶17

Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

¶18

Order on Board

¶19

21.07.2025

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner prays for the following relief(s):-

¶21

“a.This Hon’ble Court be pleased to call the entire record of the case.b. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the effect and operation of letter dated 23.06.2025 (Annexure P-7) and to set aside the letter

¶22

¶23

dated 23.06.2025.c. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit.”

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is operator of Aadhar Centre which was regulated by the Central Government of India, on 12th January 2023. A office memorandum was issued for shifting of Aadhar Centres to in House Model and since the process is in continuance for implementation of In House Model, the petitioners made application for In-house Model, for which the petitioner has to deposit security Rs 1,50,000 in way of Demand Draft in name of E- Governance Society, Rajnandgaon (C.G). However, on 23.06.2025 the Upper Collector, Rajnandgaon (C.G) issued letter to the petitioner demand draft is not submitted by the petitioner the application of petitioner will get rejected.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a poor person and in a short span of time of 2 days, the petitioner couldn't be able to deposit the security amount of Rs 1,50,000 and there is no time period has been prescribed by government or any competent authority. Therefore, he prays that a reasonable time may be granted to the petitioner for depositing the demand draft.

¶26

Learned State Counsel has raised no objection for the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking extension of time.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the fact that only two days’ time was granted to the petitioner which is a very short time to deposit said amount, therefore this Court finds it appropriate to extend the time limit till 04.08.2025 for depositing of demand draft of Rs. 1,50,000/-, failing which the respondent authorities may proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶29

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of.

sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma)

JUDGE

alfiza

Parmeshwar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmeshwar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

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

Roshan Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kawasi Lakhma Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Sima Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manish Agrawal, Director Vs Vijay Agrawal

Radhe Shyam Mehra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rizwan Memon (Proprietor M/S Rajju Bhai Memon Rice Industries) Vs Union of India