1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 936 of 2025 1 - Bibhas Das (In Person) S/o Respected Late Sukumar Das Aged About 57 Years Permanent Address- C/o Maa, Reverend Smt Kamala Das Itina Colony, Block-C, P.O. Banipur Dist North 24 Parganas, West Bengal Pin 743233 Postal Address For Correspondence Post Box No. 16, Head Post Office, 495001 Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India The Secretary, Ministry Of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi 2 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Chief Executive Officer And Chairman Railway Board, Ministry Of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi Through The Deputy Solicitor General, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The General Manager South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Gm Building, 5th Floor, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh- 495004 ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bibhas Das, Petitioner in Person Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 16/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present contempt petition against the willful violation of the order dated 29.01.2025 passed in WPC No. 565/2025, whereby the following order have been passed by the learned Singe Judge as under: ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.07.16 17:23:21 +0530 2 “Mr. Bibhas Das, Petitioner in person. Ms. Annapurna Tiwari, Central Govt. Counsel for respondents No. 1, 3 & 4/Union of India. Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Heard. Issue notice to the respondents. Ms. Annapurna Tiwari, Central Govt. Counsel and Mr. Santosh Bharat, PL accepts notice on behalf of their respective respondents, hence process fee need not be paid. Learned counsel for the respondent prays for and is granted three weeks’ time to file reply. List this case thereafter” 2. The petitioner in person would submit that on 29.01.2025 the respondents was granted three weeks’ time to file reply in the case but they have not filed any reply in the matter which is willful violation of the Courts’ order, therefore, they may be punished for contempt of Court. 3. I have heard petitioner in person and perused the the material annexed with the petition. 4. From perusal of the order under contempt dated 29.01.2025, it appears that the learned Single Judge has granted three weeks’ time to file reply in the matter. There is no any direction to the respondent to file reply mandatorily but it is only a time granted to file reply in the matter in the opinion of the Court it does amount to any willful violation of the Courts’ order which warrants this Court to issue notice to the respondents under contempt of Courts Act. 5. Accordingly, the present contempt petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok