1 2025:CGHC:11827 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1701 of 2025 1 - Hem Shankar Sinha S/o Jodharam Aged About 76 Years Retired Time Keeper From Office Of Executive Engineer Water Management Division Rudri R/o Village Haldi Tahsil Balod District - Balod (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Shanta Bai W/o Sitaram Aged About 73 Years Retired Sweeper From Office Of Executive Engineer Water Management Division Rudri R/o Village Gurur Tahsil Gurur District - Balod (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Parvat Bai W/o Late Bisahu Ram Nirmalkar Aged About 65 Years R/o Civil Colony Gangrel Tahsil And District - Dhamtari (C.G.) The Petitioner Is Legal Heirs Of Deceased Employee Bisahu Ram Nirmalkar (Chowkidar ) 4 - Yaduvansh Nath S/o Late Chaman Lal Sinha Aged About 52 Years R/o Rsp Colony Gangrel Tahsil And District - Dhamtari (C.G.) The Petitioner Is S/o Deceased Employee Chaman Lal Sinha (Assistant Mechanic ) Who Retired From Office Of Executive Engineer Heavy Machinery Division Rudri 5 - Kanhaiya Lal S/o Kheduram Sahu Aged About 70 Years Retired Jeep Driver From Office Of Executive Engineer Water Management Division Rudri R/o Shanti Nagar Gurur Tahsil Gurur District - Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.03.18 17:53:17 +0530 2 2 - Engineer In Chief Water Resources Department Shivnath Mandal North Block Sector- 19 Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Jalashay Pariyojna Water Resources Department Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resources Management Division Rudri Dhamtari District - Dhamtari (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Heavy Machinery Division Rudri Tahsil And District - Dhamtari (C.G.) 6 - Executive Engineer E/ M Machinery Division Rudri Tahsil And District - Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 10/03/2025 1. Heard Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, learned Panel Lawyer for State/respondent/s. 2. This petition is heard finally subject to the condition that the default as pointed out by this Registry is removed. 3. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased 3 to issue the direction for the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of leave encashment.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners i.e. petitioners No.1, 2, 5, husband of petitioner No.3 and father of petitioner No.4 were engaging as Gangman in respondent department, their salary was charge in project, they were granted salary as monthly basis since initial date of appointment under the work charge and contingency paid employees, as per circular issued by state government, the services of petitioners are governed by Chhattisgarh irrigation Department Contingency Paid Employees Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules. The Petitioners/Deceased employees have attained the age of superannuation and now they have been retired from service. The respondent authorities granted pension and gratuity to petitioner after retirement, but benefit of leave encashment has not been granted to petitioner, the respondent authorities not count all service rendered by petitions in the department for grant of gratuity. It is respectfully submitted that, leave benefits of the petitioners are governed by the Chhattisgarh Work-Charged / Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules, 1977 (herein after the Rules, 1977) which has been made by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh and has been adopted by the State of Chhattisgarh under the exercise of power conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The leave benefits of the petitioners are governed by the Madhya Pradesh Work-Charged / 4 Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules, 1977 (herein after the Rules, 1977) which has been made by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh and has been adopted by the State of Chhattisgarh under the exercise of power conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that from bare perusal of Rule 7 of the Rules, 1977 it is quite vivid that leave encashment is part of the salary, therefore, leave credited in the account of the Work Charged / Contingency Paid employees deserve to get encashment. As the petitioners are entitled for benefits of leave encashment, as there is no prohibition in release of leave encashment amounts to petitioners under the Rules, therefore, leave credited in the account of the work charged/contingency paid employees deserved to get encashment. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) and other connected matters decided on 30.09.2022, the petitioners are entitled for leave encashment. 5. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioners and it is also not reflected as to whether the petitioners have completed the minimum period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 5 7. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority within the period of ‘30 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate their claim. In the event of filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioners are found to be similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (surpa), their claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) expeditiously preferably within the period of ‘90 days’ from the date of submission of their said representation. 8. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi