1 2025:CGHC:11066 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1645 of 2025 1 - Ghanshyam Prasad Bhatt S/o Late Bhikham Lal Bhatt Aged About 70 Years Retired Pump Attendant Posted At Office Of S.D.O. Public Work Department, Sub Division No. 1 Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 2 - S.R. Bhatt S/o Late Bisun Prasad Bhatt Aged About 77 Years Retired Sthal Sahayak Posted At Office Of S.D.O. Public Work Department, Sub Division No. 02 Rajnandgaon District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Parvati Dadsena W/o Late Bhola Prasad Dadsena Aged About 46 Years R/o Anand Nagar Servant Quarter Ward N. 32 Telibandha District- Raipur (C.G.) Husband Of Petitioner Was Posted As Helper At Office Of S.D.O. (E And M) Public Work Department Mantralaya Sub Division Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioners Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar New Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan Sector 19 North Block Atal Nagar New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department Mandal Office Sirpur Bhawan Behind Aakashwani Civil Line Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Division No. 01 Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer (B/r) Public Works Department, Division Rajnandgaon District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 6 - Executive Engineer (E And M) Public Works Department, Division Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Joint Director Pension, Account And Treasury Department, Raipur Division, District- Raipur (C.G.) 8 - Joint Director Pension, Account And Treasury Department, Durg Division, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Ms. Nilu Kumari Singh, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 06/03/2025 1. Heard Mr. Nilu Singh, learned counsel petitioners as well as Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, learned Government Advocate for State/respondents. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition and be pleased to issue an order/direction to the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of leave encashment to the petitioners. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be call for the records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioner’s matter. 10.2. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Petitioner No. 1 & 2 as also, the husband of the Petitioner No. 3 were initially appointed on temporary basis as work charged contingency paid 3 employees in the Public Works Department. Petitioners and the husband of the Petitioner No. 3 were discharging their duty up to the satisfaction of their superior authorities without any complaint and subsequently, they have become permanent employees and have retired from their services. During their service, the petitioners have performed their duties and obligations bestowed upon them with utmost sincerity and to the best of their capabilities with an unblemished service record. He 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 petitioner 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. 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 4 persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (surpa), their claims 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 the said representation. 7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Dey