1 2025:CGHC:10535 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1604 of 2025 1 - Smt. Premlata Pandey W/o Late Shri Chhedu Prasad Pandey Aged About 68 Years Husband Was Retired As Sthal Sahayak From Public Works Department, Division- Bemetara, Distt.- Bemetara (C.G.), R/o Village- Gandai, Ward No.-7, Distt.- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Division- Bemetara, Distt.- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Shishir Dixit, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Kawaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 04/03/2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of order and direct the respondents to grant leave encashment and surrender leave tot he petitioners with interest in view of the order dated 30.09.2022 in W.P.S. No. 3870/2021 Faguvaram Patel & ors. Vs State of Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 CG & ors.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Daily Wager with the respondent department and subsequently service of the employee was regularized. The petitioner, after permanent status, had retired after attaining the age of superannuation. During her service, she has performed her duties and obligations bestowed upon her with utmost sincerity and to the best of his 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 petitioner is also entitled for leave encashment. 3. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioner and it is also not reflected as to whether the petitioner has completed the minimum period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 5. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner 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 his claim. In the event of filing of representation, on 3 due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (surpa), his 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 the said representation. 6. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Shayna