1 2025:CGHC:4301 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 617 of 2025 1 - Longdas Manikpuri S/o Mangaldas Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Lalpur, P/o- Etmannagar, Machadoli, Distt. Korba (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Water Resources And Ground Water Survey Circle, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Senior Ground Water Power Divisional Ground Water Survey, Unit No.-09, Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Shri H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate For State/Respondents : Ms. Ayushi Agrawal, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.02.11 21:22:03 +0530 2 Order on Board 23/01/2025 1. By filing this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondents to produce the entire records of the case particularly the records of the petitioner. 10.2 That, Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/suitable direction to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of leave encashment in light of the provision of Leave Rules 1977. 10.3 That, Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to award any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a retired employee. He was working as work charged employee in the Water Resources Department/respondent. It is his claim that in light of the judgment passed by this Court on 30.9.2022 in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected matters, the petitioner is entitled for leave encashment. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits 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 period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 4. I have heard the arguments raised on behalf of the parties and perused the documents available. 3 5. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on merits of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate their 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 (supra), his claim shall be decided by the respondents authorities in light of the judgment of Faguvaram Patel (supra) expeditiously preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of submission of the said representation. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Gopal Singh