2025:CGHC:26484 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5560 of 2025 1 - Mari Tayde S/o. Late Ninaji Tayde Aged About 72 Years R/o. Irrigation Colony, Rampur, District - Korba (C.G.) (Retired Employee Claiming Leave Enchashment For Himself) 2 - Vishal Prasad Shriwas S/o. Late Ved Prakash Shriwas Aged About 64 Years R/o. Village -Katori Nagoi, Post - Rawa, Tahsil- Pasan, District - Korba (C.G.) (Retired Employee Claiming Leave Encashment For Himself) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resource, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary Department Of General Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Secretary Department Of Finance, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Engineer-In-Chief Water Resource Department, Shivnath Bhawan, Sector -19, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Chief Engineer Hasdeo Kachhar, Water Resource Department, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Superintendent Engineer Water Resource Circle, Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Division, Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioners : Shri Avinash Singh, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri KS Saini, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 20.06.2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are retired employees of the Water Resource Department, and were working as Work Charged Contingency paid employees. It is further submitted that in light of judgment passed Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.06.23 14:34:42 +0530 Wps 5560 of 2025 2 by this Court in WPS-3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel, and others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and others), and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, present petitioners are also entitled for leave encashment. 2. Learned State counsel would submit that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioners, and it is also not reflected as to whether the petitioners have 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 petitioners to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondent/ competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate their claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioners are found to be similarly situated persons as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), their 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. 5. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma