1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3540 of 2025 1 - Ram Bai Vishwakarma W/o Late Shri Pyare Lal Vishwakarma Aged About 65 Years R/o Arvind Nagar, Bandhawapara, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Panchayat Directorate, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director Panchayat And Social Welfare, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Sahil Singh, Advocate. For State : Shri Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 09.06 .202 5 1. Heard. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the Husband of petitioner stood retired as Work Charged/Contingency Paid Employee. He would further submit that the husband of petitioner was entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment. He stated that an identical issue has already been come up for hearing before this Court bearing Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 30.09.2022. In the light of Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.06.09 17:52:12 +0530 2 Faguvaram (supra) the petitioner raised identical issue which may be allowed in her favour. He submits that, at this stage, petitioner may be permitted to submit representation before the respondents/competent authority and respondents/competent authority may be directed to consider and decide the representation of petitioner expeditiously within specific period as fixed by this Court. 3. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking direction to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner, at this stage, he is having no objection. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed of in light of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) reserving liberty to the petitioner to make detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority. In the event, petitioner submits representation, her claim shall be considered and decided in accordance with the relevant rules and law and after verification of the service records of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within the period of 'three months' from the date of receipt of the such representation, keeping in mind the decision in case of Faguvaram Patel (Supra). 6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder