1 2025:CGHC:28919 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6118 of 2025 1 - Smt. Ayti W/o Deva (Deva Kunjam) Aged About 48 Years R/o House No. 78 School Para Ward No. 12 Korra Distt Sukuma, C.G. 2 - Sapna Runjha D/o Uja Lakshmaiya (Laxmaya Runjha) Aged About 26 Years R/o House No. 00 Sodipara, Subhash Chandra Bose Ward No. 01 Distt. Sukuma, C.G. 3 - Ayti W/o Chaitu Yadav (Cheetu) Aged About 69 Years R/o Jhaliyaras Post Jirampal Distt. Sukuma, C.G. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Chief Engineer (Administration) Public Works Department, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. 5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. 6 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department (Bh/sa) Sukuma Division Distt. Sukuma (C.G.) 7 - Divisional Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension Bastar Division Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Akash Pandey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Vikas A. Shrivastava, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 30-06-2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners who stood Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 retired as Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees, petitioners are entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment to petitioners. Identical issue came up for hearing before this Court in case of Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of C.G., in W.P.(S) No. 3870 of 2021 decided on 30.09.2022, wherein petitioners have raised identical issue which was allowed in their favour. He submits that at this stage, petitioners may be permitted to submit representation in light of Faguvaram Patel (supra) and respondents be directed to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioners expeditiously within specified time. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioners are not pressing their petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to decide the representations to be submitted by petitioners, at this stage, she is having no objection. 3. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 4. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioners, this petition is disposed of in light of the case of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) and the petitioners are at liberty to make representation within a period fo 15 days from receipt of copy of this order. In the event, the petitioners are found to be similarly situated persons, their claim shall be decided by the respondents in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation. 5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil