1 2025:CGHC:1920 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 214 of 2025 1 - Smt. Shanti Bai W/o Kuswa Ram Kumhar Aged About 72 Years R/o Village Post- Barpali Kalan Block And District- Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Pil Lal Bareth S/o Buddhu Ram Bareth Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Post Barpali Kalan Block And District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works, Nirman Bhawan, North Block, New Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bilaspur Zone, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Public Works Department Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Champa Division, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Dansena, Advocate Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI 2 For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy. Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13/01/2025 1. Heard. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent authority to give benefit of leave encashment within stipulated time to the petitioner with interest, in the interest of justice. 10.3 And any other relief, which the court deems fit and proper. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner No.2 were working their duty with utmost, sincerity and to the satisfaction of his superiors. The petitioner No. 1 was initially appointed in the year 1978 as daily wage employee and thereafter he has given appointment on work- charge to the post of "unskilled labour" in respondent department and due to superannuation, he was retired from service in the year 2012 after regularization in such department, she has given all the retiral dues except amount of leave encashment and the 3 father of the Petitioner No. 2 namely late. Buddhuram was initially appointed in the respondent depertment in 01.12.1978 as daily wage employee and thereafter he has given appointment on work- charge to the post of "unskilled labour" in respondent department and due to superannuation, he was retired from service on 31.03.2012 after regularization in such department, he has given all the retiral dues except amount of leave encashment. They were never communicated any adverse remarks in their entire service period and till superannuation period his length of service period has more than 34 years. They were worked as work charged/ contingency paid employees in the respondents department 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 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. 4 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