1 2025:CGHC:11828 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1702 of 2025 1 - Ghunaroo S/o Shri Jaitram Aged About 61 Years R/o Village And Post - Reda, Tahsil - Sarangarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Dayamati Rathiya W/o Late Shri Lakhan Lal Rathiya Aged About 44 Years R/o Village And Post- Naharpali, Tahsil- Kharsia, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, National Highway Division Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shahil Singh, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.03.18 17:51:09 +0530 2 Order on Board 10/03/2025 1. Heard Mr. Shahil Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Ms. Poorva Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer for State/respondent/s. 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 call for the entire records leading to the impugned action of the respondents, for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to release the entire amount of leave encashment as entitled to the petitioners, in light of the judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court in matter of Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.- WPS No. 3870 of 2021 and other connected matters. 10.3) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners retired from service of Labour from respondent PWD department, after attaining superannuation and husband of petitioner No. 2 has died, thereby, both the petitioners are receiving their respective pensions after retirement. The respondent Public Works Department is government agency responsible for building and maintaining public services, such as public government 3 construction, highways, bridges, public transportation, drinking water sources, etc. Thereby receiving pension in Respondent Public Works Department, nonetheless, till date the respondents have not granted the leave encashment, as entitled to them in terms of the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Work-Charged/Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules, 1977. The leave benefits of the petitioners are governed by the Madhya Pradesh 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. 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 4 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 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