1 2025:CGHC:2130 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 265 of 2025 Smt. Kamla Rao W/o Late Jagdish Rao Aged About 63 Years R/o C/o Ghanta Jagdish Rao House No. 63 Jogendra Mahapatra Gali Bhairamdev Ward Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. ... Petitioner 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, (bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 01 Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. 5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department, (bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 01 Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. 6 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department, (bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 01 Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 14.01.2025 1. The writ petition has been listed for Orders on Office Notes. As the petition has heard and decided finally, the defects as pointed out by the Registry, is overruled. YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.01.15 18:35:13 +0530 2 2. Heard Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Khulesh Sahu, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents. 3. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 To issue an appropriate writ or order to direct the respondent’s authority to grant the benefits of leave encashment in favour of the petitioner. 10.2 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances including award of cost of the petition may also be granted.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that husband of petitioner is retired employees of the respondent department, who was working as Driver (work charged/contingency paid employee) and whose services have been later regularized under the respondent authorities. He 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 petitioner is entitled for leave encashment. 5. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioner and it is also not reflected as to 3 whether the husband of petitioner has completed the minimum period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 7. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner 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 her claim. In the event of filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (surpa), her 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 the said representation. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/-/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh