1 2025:CGHC:41696 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4151 of 2025 1 - Renuka Sahu W/o Bhojwani Sahu, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village - Ward No. 15, Nagar Panchayat - Churiya, Tehsil - Churiya, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) 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, Headquarter, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4 - Office Of District E-Governance Society, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 5 - Unique Identification Authority Of India (Uidai), Represented By 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 8 - Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh Infotech Promotion Society, 3rd Floor, Sdc Building, Opp. New Circuit House, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Advocate For Respondent/State For Respondent No. 5 & 7 For Respondent No. 6 & 8 : : : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer Mr. Niraj Baghel on behalf of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI Mr. Rajesh Kesharwani, Advocate 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 19/08/2025 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is praying for the following reliefs: “10.1 This Hon’ble Court be pleased to call the entire record of the case. 10.2 This Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the effect and operation with regards to the petitioner/No-Coercive step till the 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 deficiency report of December 2024 to February 2025, disassociation of operator’s order dated 13.05.2025 (Annexure P/5) with regards to the petitioner. 10.3 This 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 Cost of the petition may be allowed.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Aadhar operator and petitioner has been disassociated with the order 3 dated 13.05.2025 and has been suspended for 1 year for making 215 wrong entries i.e. error of documents i.e. Error of DOE-II i.e., Document Error (DOE-II) i. Poor quality document. ii. Invalid document. iii. Demographic data mismatch. for the month of December, 2024, which petitioner does has objection that petitioner is the experienced aadhar operator of more than 9 years and only in 1 month 215 wrong entries cannot be made that to without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and as per the various notification of the UIDAI the VLE Model has been going to be shifted in In-House Model, whose procedure has already been issued and notice of depositing of security amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- has already been issued to the petitioner, if the issue with regard to the 215 wrong entries has not been resolved within time then, the candidature of the petitioner would be rejected for In House Model, which is the only source of the Income of the petitioner since last many year and the notice dated 07.05.2025 already declared that any operator who has been suspended cannot be accepted for In-House Model, petitioner could not be able to avail himself for In House Model as petitioner is currently working under VLE Model. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 6 & 8 submits that the petitioner may file an application for clarification which will be decided by the authorities after giving him sufficient opportunity of hearing. 4. Learned State counsel raised no objection. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective 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 and for providing data before the Respondent No. 3 and 6 within ‘15 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order and in-turn Respondent No. 3 and 6 shall consider and decide the petitioners’ representation subject to verification of the data, in accordance with rules, regulations and law, expeditiously as soon as possible after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 7. Meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima