1 2025:CGHC:12273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1741 of 2025 1 - Smt. Kailashpati Bai Wd/o Late Sukhram Aged About 55 Years R/o Ward No. 6 Raimunda (Kersai) Tahsil Farsabahar District - Jashpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Public Works Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Naya Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works Nirman Bhawan North Block Naya Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department Bilaspur Zone District - Bilaspur (C.G.). Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department Jashpur Division District - Jashpur (C.G.). 5 - Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension Ambikapur District - Surguja (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jeet Ram Patel, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 12/03/2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents authorities to give benefit of leave encashment within stipulated time to the petitioner with interest, in the interest of the justice. 10.3 That, any other relief which the Hon'ble Court may deemed fit and proper also be granted to the 3 petitioner, in the interest of justice..” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner was initially appointed as work charge employee in respondent department/Public Works Department in the year 1976 and after retirement died in the year 2023, the deceased employee has given some retiral dues except amount of leave encashment. He 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 petitioner is entitled for leave encashment. 3. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents has not been filed by the petitioner and it is also not reflected as to whether the husband of the petitioner has completed the minimum period of the 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 4 substantiate his claim. In the event of filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (Supra), 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 Raghu Jat