1 2025:CGHC:1426 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 132 of 2025 1 - Vipat Kumar Sahu S/o Late Jaituram Sahu Aged About 65 Years R/o Parwedih, Ward No. 1, Sambalpur, Tehsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 2 - Ahilya Vishwakarma Wd/o Late Bhagwat Vishwakarma Aged About 45 Years R/o School Line, Gangrel, R.S.P. Colony, Tehsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 3 - Rajkumari Dahare S/o Late Bahur Ram Dahare Aged About 54 Years R/o Sangam Chowk, Village - Dhahi, Tehsil And District - Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 4 - S.N. Nayar S/o Late Damodharan Nayar Aged About 72 Years At Present R/o Village - Sreenilayam, Elakolloor, Post Office - Konni, Kozhenchery, District - Pathanamthitta, Kerala ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resource, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Office Of Chief Engineer Mahanadi Project, Department Of Water Resource, Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Office Of Sub-Divisional Officer Mrp, Sub-Division No. 1, Gangrel, Post Office, Tehsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI 2 4 - Office Of Sub-Divisional Officer Mrp, Sub-Division No. 8, Rudri, Post Office, Tehsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Kawaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 09/01/2025 1. Heard. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct the respondent authorities to grant leave encashment to the petitioner. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner representation within such time limit as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in light and circumstances of the case. 10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioners in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 & 4 and husband of petitioner No.2 & 3 are retired employees of the respondent department. The petitioners were 3 initially employed as daily wage employee in the office of respondent. That after regularization, the petitioner No. 1 worked without any complaint completed their service and retired on 31/8/2021 and husband of petitioner No. 2 retired on 31/7/22 and subsequently died on 24/12/22. The husband of petitioner No.3 was given first appointment on 14/8/2008 after regularization and thereafter during service, he died on 27/9/2017. The petitioner No. 4 was initially appointed on 6/1/1988 after regularization in the respondent department, he retired on 29/2/2012. Thereby petitioner's pension were fixed and other retirement benefits were extended to the petitioners, but no leave encashment was granted to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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. 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 4 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