1 2025:CGHC:37535 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8784 of 2025 1 - B. Kumar S/o B. Mukund Rao, Aged About 63 Years Retired Chowkidar Posted At Office Of S.D.O. (E And M) Light Machinery Nalkoop And Gate Sub-Division Durg Water Resources Department, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) R/o- Near Laxmi Laundry Shop No. 43 Sector 09 Bhilai Nagar Civic Center District Durg (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Smt. Nagesar Bai Sahu W/o Late Krishna Kumar Sahu, Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Basula (Khaprikhurd), Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) Husband Of Petitioner Was Retired Chowkidar Posted At Office Of S.D.O. (E And M) Light Machinery Nalkoop And Gate Sub-Division Rajnandgaon Water Resources Department, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Water Resources Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Department, Sihawa Bhawan New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godavari Kachhar Department Of Water Resources Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Executive Engineer (E And M) Light Machinery Nalkoop And Gate Division Durg Water Resources Department, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Joint Director, Pension And Account Treasury Department Durg Division, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.08.01 11:34:24 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. F. S. Khare, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 31/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are retired employees of the respondents’ Departments and were working as Work Charged Contingency paid employees. 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 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 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 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), 3 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, the present petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika