1 2025:CGHC:9873 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1467 of 2025 1 - Sombai Jami W/o Laleya Jami Aged About 60 Years R/o Pawaras Ward No. 14 Distt. Sukuma C.G. 2 - Chandramani Sethiya W/o Ajaman Singh Sethiya Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 22 Shabari Nagar Ward No. 12 Distt. Sukuma C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Engineer In Chief, Public Works Department, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Chief Engineer (Administration) Public Works Department, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar C.G. 5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department Jagalpur Distt. Bastar C.G. 6 - The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (Bh/sa) Sukuma Division Distt. Sukuma C.G. RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.02.28 16:38:17 +0530 2 7 - Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Account And Pension Bastar Division Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajeet Singh, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 27/02/2025 1. Heard Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Ajeet Singh, learned Government Advocate for State/respondents. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 To issue an appropriate writ or order to direct the respondent’s authority to grant the benefits of leave encashment in favour of the petitioners. 10.2. Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances including award of cost of the petition may also be granted.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the legal representative of deceased employee who was working under the respondent department and the instant petition is being preferred for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of petitioners for extending the benefits of leave 3 encashment as per provisions of C.G. Work Charged /Contingency Paid Employee Leave Rules 1977. The deceased employee were initially appointed under the respondent No.1 department and upon attaining age of superannuation the they have been retired from services as regular employee. After retirement/death the respondent authorities have released the pension and gratuity in favour of the deceased employee but the benefits of leave encashment have not been extended in favour of petitioners, therefore they prayed for payment of leave encashment is governed by M.P. Work/Charged Contingency paid Employee Leave Rules 1977, 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. 4. 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. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 6. 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. 7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi