1 2025:CGHC:31516 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3503 of 2025 Ageshwar Kumar Verma S/o Shankar Lal Verma Aged About 28 Years R/o Vill- Indamara, Block-Rajnandgaon Dist- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Information Technology, Electronics And Communication, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Headqurter, 5q5wpqm, Sector 19, Kotara Bhanata, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh (C.G.) 3 - Collector Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4 - Upper Collector Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G) 5 - Office Of District E-Governanace Society Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 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. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Advocate For State : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, PL VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.07.09 17:11:55 +0530 2 For Respondent No.6 : Mr. Niraj Baghel, CGC on behalf of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 09/07/2025 Heard. 1. The petitioner has been filed this writ petition on the following relief(s) : “10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to call the entire records of the case. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the effect and operation of letter dated 23.06.2025 (Annexure 7) and set aside the letter dated 23.06.2025. 10.3. That, the Hon'ble Court be further pleased to pass such order in favour of the petitioner against the respondent as it may deem fit under the facts and circumstances. 10.4. Costs of the petition may be allowed.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner contended 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 3 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 to deposit the security amount before 5:30 P.M of 25.06.2025, if the demand draft is not submitted by the petitioner the application of petitioner will get rejected. 3. He further contended that the petitioner is a poor person and in a short span of time of 02 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. 4. Learned State Counsel has raised no objection for the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking extension of time. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4 6. 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 21.07.2025 for depositing of demand draft of Rs. 1,50,000/-, failing which the respondent authorities may proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant