1 2025:CGHC:23679 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4160 of 2025 1 - Omprakash Verma S/o. Shri Ram Gopal Verma Aged About 62 Years Retired Assistant Fitter At Executive Engineer Minimata Bango (E./m/) Division Machadoli, Head Office Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) R/o. Village - Alomau, Majtr Maupara, Bandipur, Fatehpur, Uttar Pradesh - 212652. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Water Resource, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer-In-Chief Water Resource Department, Shivnath Bhawan, New Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Minimata (Hasdeo) Bango Pariyojana, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent Engineer (E./m.) Water Resource Circle, Sakri, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Minimata Bango (E./m.) Division Machadoli, Head Office - Katghora, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 6 - Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Jeet Ram Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate and Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.13 19:05:17 +0530 2 Order on Board 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 his 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), his 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