1 2025:CGHC:23631 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3810 of 2025 1 - Smt. Anisha Begum W/o Late Shri Mohd. Sharif Khan Aged About 42 Years Occupation -House Wife R/o Risaipara Dhamtari, Tahsil And Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Public Health Engineering Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, Distt.-Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering Department, Jagdalpur, Distt.- Bastar (C.G.) 3 - Assistant Engineer Sub-Division Public Health Engineering Department Kanker Distt.- North Baster Baster (C.G.) 4 - Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pension, Division Jagdalpur, Distt.- Baster (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.13 19:10:52 +0530 2 12/06/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is retired employee of the respondents’ Departments and was working as Work Charged Contingency paid employee. It is further submitted that in light of judgment passed by this Court in WPS No. 3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, present petitioner is also entitled for leave encashment. 2. Learned State counsel would submit that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioner, and it is also not reflected as to whether the petitioner has completed the minimum service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record. 4. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondents/competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate her claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), her claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment passed in that case expeditiously preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of submission of the said representation. 3 5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved