1 2025:CGHC:36035 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3851 of 2025 1 - Maheshwari Agrawal W/o Late Devi Das Agrawal Aged About 72 Years R/o Near Sagar Hospital, Bhawna Nagar, Kachna Road, Raipur, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, C.G. 2 - Superintendent Of Police Raipur, Office Of S P, Raipur District, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Cyber Crime Cell Through Nodal Officer, Raipur, Office Of Cyber Crime Cell, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Department Of Telecommunications Through The Secretary, Government Of India, Sanchar Bhawan, 20 Ashoka Road, New Delhi- 110001 5 - Bharti Airtel Ltd. Through Its Nodal Officer, 3rd And 4th Floor, Scheme No. 54, A. B. Road, Metro Tower, Near Vijay Nagar Square, Indore- 452010, M.P. ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 25/07/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition challenges the arbitrary and illegal action of the respondents in Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.07.28 11:37:07 +0530 2 blocking the mobile number 8839875899 belonging to the petitioner without serving any notice, affording any hearing or conducting any inquiry, solely on the basis of an unverified complaint and administrative direction. The blocking was carried out in alleged compliance with Department of Telecommunications guidelines, but in gross violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has made repeated attempts to seek redressal through the RTI, a legal notice and a personal inquiry, but has received no satisfactory response. The present petition, therefore, seeks the issuance of appropriate writ including mandamus for the restoration of the mobile number, declaration of the action as unconstitutional, disciplinary action against erring officials, and compensation for the mental agony and harassment suffered. 3. Learned counsel for respondents opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that after verification of facts, the respondent-authorities have blocked the mobile number. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that a number of complaints have been lodged against the mobile number of the petitioner and after due verification of the material evidence vide order dated 10.06.2025 and 04.02.2025, the respondent have blocked the number of the 3 petitioner, therefore no ground has been made by the petitioner which warrants interference. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti