1 2025:CGHC:15068 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 175 of 2025 1 - Maa Bhagwati Construction A Partnership Firm Through Its Partner Parul Rai S/o Shri Rajesh Kumar Rai, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Flat No. 107, First Floor, Vaishali Pride, Minocha Colony, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh- 495001 ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Kamlesh Kumar Pipri Engineer-In-Chief, Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Vijay Kumar Bhatpahri Engineer-In-Chief (Additional Charge), Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 19-02-2025) --- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Adv. For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Adv. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Anup Majumdar, Adv. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Order on Board 28.03.2025 1) The instant contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner herein, alleging non-compliance of this Court’s order dated 07.10.2024 passed in WPC No. 1410/2023. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that order of this Court has not been complied in its letter and spirit. 3) Learned counsel for respondent produced an order dated 24.03.2025 and submits that a direction issued by this Court has already been complied with. 4) The document dated 24.03.2025 is taken on record. 5) The operative part of the order dated 07.10.2024 in WPC No. 1410/2023 is being reproduced hereinunder:- Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.03.29 12:18:18 +0530 2 “Therefore, at this stage, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner may be given an opportunity to raise all the grounds taken in this petition by filing the detailed reply to the notice dated 21.02.2023 (Annexure P-10) within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order to respondent No. 2. The petitioner would be at liberty place all the documents which he intends to reply upon along with the reply to be submitted by him. On such reply being filed, it is expected from respondent No. 2 to consider all the grounds raised by the petitioner in his reply in its proper perspective and pass a speaking order after within 45 days from the date of receipt of reply after giving personal hearing to the petitioner, If any adverse order passed, the petitioner would be free to challenge the same. 6) On perusal of records, respondent has passed order on 24.03.2025 and cancelled the registration of the contractor for 26 months instead of 60 months (from 06.03.2023 to 05.05.2025. 7) It is admitted fact that the directives issued by this Court was only for deciding the representation of the petitioner and now that the respondents have decided the representation of the petitioner. Thus, order dated 07.10.2024 in WPC 1410/2023 stands complied with. If at all any grievance still survives on the part of the petitioner, he would be at liberty to challenge the subsequent order before appropriate forum. 8) Pursuant to the directives having been complied with by the respondents, this Court is of the view that the present contempt petition stands accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Consequently, the respondents are discharged from the contempt proceedings. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti