1 2025:CGHC:37481 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4024 of 2025 1 - Agasti Bhoi S/o Bhism Dev Bhoi, Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Jirapali, Post - Dongripali, Tehsil Baramkela, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigadh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Information Technology, Electronics And Communication, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Headquarter, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Sarangarh Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4 - Office Of District E - Governance Society, Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) 5 - Unique Indentification Authority Of India (Uidai), Through Its Chief Executive Officer Ceo Office At 3rd Floor Tower Ii Jeevan Bharti Building, Cannaught Circle, New Delhi 6 - Chhattisgarh Infotech Promotion Society, 3rd Floor, Sdc Building, Opp. New Circuit House, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 7 - Deputy Director General, Unique Identification Authority Of India, Regional Office, Hyderabad, (Telangana) 8 - Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh Infotech Promotion Society, 3rd Floor, Sdc Building, Opp. New Circuit House, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 ---Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, P.L. For Resopondent-UOI : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI For Respondent No. 6 & 8 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.08.01 17:29:08 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 31/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition on the following relief:- “(i) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition preferred by the petitioner and call for the records pertaining to the present case. (ii) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the effect and operation with regard to the petitioner/ no coercive step till final outcome of this petition or till the concerned authority give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with clearance of the dispute and set-aside the letter/notice dated 07.05.2025 (Annexure P/6) passed by the Office of Chips i.e. Chief Executive Officer and 30.05.2025 (Annexure P/7) and direct the respondent authorities to decide the respondent authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P/8) because sufficient time has been passed and could rise to adverse action against the petitioner. (iii) That any other order/relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be awarded to the petitioner in the ends of justice along with the cost of the petition may kindly also be awarded to the petitioners.” 2. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is the Aadhaar Operator and he has served with the Common order of depositing/clearance of the penalty, which petitioner is agree to deposit but in calculation of penalty there is several mistakes in calculation and also there is no direction/clause for opportunity of hearing and there is no clause of payment which petitioner has to take from the concerned respondent/CHIPS for the work done by the petitioner, that there is arbitrary and illegal notice was issued 3 for clearance of the penalties only but there is no clause/direction for the amount which has to be paid by the CHIPS to petitioner and due to non-clearance of the penalty, petitioner couldn't be able to avail himself for In House Model as petitioner is currently working under VLE Model. 3. On 07.05.2025 (Annexure P/6), respondent No.6 issued a direction to all the Collectors of the State regarding implementation of In-House model of Aadhar services in the State with criteria that Operators with no payment pendency/recovery against Aadhar services to CHIPS would be considered for unboarding process for ECMP/UCL application. Any outstanding payment, owed to any operator, should be settled using the CHIPS Payment wallet system or any other mode suggested by CHIPS. 4. Learned counsel for respondents opposes the submission made by counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission made by learned counsel for the parties, at this stage, the petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file representation raising his all grievances before the Respondent No.3 within ‘15 days’ from today and to also file 4 representation before the Collector for providing data and in- turn Respondent No.3 shall consider and decide the petitioner’s representation subject to verification of the data, in accordance with rules, regulations and law, expeditiously preferably within a period of ‘45 days’ from the date of receipt of representation. 7. Meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge