Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. Invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short, the Act, 1971), this contempt petition has been filed by the contempt petitioner herein alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 23.09.2014 passed by Division Bench of this Court in WPC No. 1858 of 2014 (M/s. Mile Stone Soft. Tech. Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others).

2. The imperative facts, necessary to find-out whether respondent/contemnor prima facie dis-obeyed and disregarded the order of this Court and as to whether charges is to be framed against the respondent/contemnor are as under:--

"2.1 The contempt petitioner herein instituted a writ petition (C) 1858 of 2014 impleading the State of Chhattisgarh, Election Commission of India & the Chief Electoral Officer, Chhattisgarh, questioning the order dated 10.09.2014 passed by the Chief Electoral Officer, Election Commission of Chhattisgarh. In the said writ petition Division Bench of this court by order dated 23.09.2014 directed the respondent No. 2 & 3 therein namely Election Commission of India and the Chief Electoral Officer, Election Commission of Chhattisgarh to allow the petitioner to participate in tender proceeding without depositing the earnest money. The order passed by Division Bench of this court was communicated to the respondent contemnor on 27.09.2014, but the respondent/contemnor did not comply the order complained of and on 16.10.2014 directed all District Magistrate/DRO to execute agreements with the successful tenderer and wilfully disobeyed the order of this court, and thus, charges for contempt for disregarding the order of this Court dated 23.09.2014 be framed against the respondent/contemnor for punishing under Section 12 of the Act, 1971."

3. Rule was issued to the respondent/contemnor requiring her to show cause as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against her and she should not be punished for wilful disobedience of court's order dated 23.09.2014 passed in WPC No. 1858 of 2014.

4. Reply-affidavit in support of defence has been filed by the respondent-contemnor refuting the charges stating inter alia that tender proceedings were already finalized on 25.09.2014 and the petitioner has not participated in the tender proceedings and it is only National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (for short, NSIC) who had taken part in the proceedings and there is no tender in name of contempt petitioner, and as such, the tender proceedings having been finalized much prior to the communication of the order of this Court to the respondent/contemnor on 27.09.2014. It was further stated that the execution of the agreement with the successful tenderer by order dated 16.10.2014 was only a preparation for issuance of work-order in pursuance of tender proceeding which had attained finality on 16.09.2014/25.09.2014 and the work of preparing photo identity card was utmost urgency and of national importance and work order was issued after passing of final order in writ petition (C) No. 1858 of 2014 dismissing the said petition on 21.11.2014, and in alternative her unconditional apology be accepted for non compliance of order, if any.

5. The contempt petitioner has filed his rejoinder pursuant to reply-affidavit filed by the respondent contemnor alleging that non compliance of court's order is deliberate and respondent contemnor has deliberately flouted the order of this court, and therefore, it cannot be bonafide as the same calls for serious view to ensure proper administration of justice.

6. Shri B.P. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the contempt petitioner would submit that order passed by Division Bench of this court on 23.09.2014 directing the respondent-contemnor to permit the petitioner to participate in the tender proceeding was duly communicated on 27.09.2014 yet, patently flouting the order of this court, the respondent-contemnor has passed the order on 16.10.2014