Disposed¶31

Suraj Dev Kumar Kushwaha v. Vikas Mishra

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jul 2026CONT/897/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CONT No. 897 of 2025, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, decided 22.07.2026 by Bibhu Datta Guru, J.; Suraj Dev Kumar Kushwaha v. Vikas Mishra, Chandrika Verma, Shahla Nigar and Jitendra Nakka; contempt proceedings over compliance with directions in WPS No. 5487 of 2024; Chhattisgarh State Watershed Management Agency (CGSWMA); fresh order dated 21.07.2026 accepting joining as Placement Employee; exemption from personal appearance of Respondent No. 2; contempt proceedings dropped; Rule discharged; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dropped; Rule discharged; contempt petition disposed of upon satisfaction that the directions in WPS No. 5487 of 2024 were duly complied with. ¶31

Suraj Dev Kumar Kushwaha Vs Vikas Mishra — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

CGHC010254142025

2026:CGHC:31112

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CONT No. 897 of 2025

¶7

Suraj Dev Kumar Kushwaha S/o Asharfi Kushwaha Aged About 45 Years G.I.S.Expert, Chhattisgarh State Watershed Management Agency (Cgswna), Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Campus Labhandi, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - Vikas Mishra Deputy Secretary, Agriculture Development And Farmer Welfare And Bio-Technology, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

Digitally signed bySHOAIB SHOAIB ANWAR ANWAR Date:2026.07.22 16:18:44 +0530

¶12

2 - Chandrika Verma, Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh State Watershed Management Agency, I.G.K.V.Campus, Labhandi Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

3 - Shahla Nigar, The Additional Chief Secretary, Agriculture Cum Commissioner Agriculture Production Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶14

4 - Jitendra Nakka Training Expert, Chhattisgarh State Watershed

¶15

¶16

Management Agency, I.G.K.V. Campus, Labhandi Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶17

... Respondent(s)

¶18

(Cause title taken from CIS)

¶19

For Petitioner(s) :	Shri A.S. Rajput,Advocate
For Respondent(s) Nos. 1 to 3 :	Shri Anoop Majumdar, Senior Advocate along with Shri Prateek Singh Thakur, Advocate
For Respondent No. 4 :	Shri Mahesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate
	appears on behalf of Shri Sunil Verma, Advocate

¶20

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶21

Order on Board 22.07.2026

¶22

On the previous date of hearing, this Court had directed the personal appearance of Respondent No. 2, the Chief Executive Officer (CGSWMA), Raipur. Today, instead of Respondent No. 2, Shri Gaya Ram, Joint Chief Executive Officer (CGSWMA), Raipur, has appeared before this Court. An application seeking exemption from the personal appearance of Respondent No. 2 has been filed, stating that Respondent No. 2 is presently posted as Director, Veterinary Services, and is on an official tour to Amul Dairy Farm for inspection of livestock. It is further stated that he is scheduled to depart from

¶23

¶24

Ahmedabad tomorrow morning and, therefore, is unable to remain present before this Court.

¶25

Upon due consideration of the grounds assigned in the application, the same is found to be justified. Accordingly, the personal appearance of Respondent No. 2 is exempted.

¶26

Insofar as compliance with the order passed by this Court in WPS No. 5487 of 2024 is concerned, learned counsel for the respondents has produced a fresh order dated 21.07.2026, which is taken on record. Shri Gaya Ram, Joint Chief Executive Officer (CGSWMA), submits that when the petitioner reported before the office of the Joint Chief Executive Officer, he was permitted to join at his place of posting. However, to ensure complete and unequivocal compliance with the directions issued by this Court, a fresh order dated 21.07.2026 has been issued, whereby the joining of the petitioner has been formally accepted and he has been permitted to discharge his duties as a Placement Employee in CGSWMA, Raipur. It is submitted that the directions contained in the order passed by this Court stand duly complied with.

¶27