1 2025:CGHC:3563 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 532 of 2025 Ram Prasad Kanwar S/o Ghashiram Kanwar (Unskilled Labour) Aged About 67 Years R/o House No. 23, Ward Number 02, Raunadhap, Dhongdraha, District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer-In-Chief Department Of Public Works, Nirman Bhawan, North Block, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department (E/ M), Korba Division, District Korba (C.G.) 4 - S.D.O. Public Works Department, Sub-Division Bhaisma, District Korba (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Treasury, Accounts And Pesion, Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ritesh Verma, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.01.23 16:57:08 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 21.01.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ritesh Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Nupur Trivedi, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 That the respondent may kindly be directed to submit the entire records as regards the petitioner's case. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the benefits of leave encashment within stipulated time to the petitioner, with interest, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble court may kindly pass any order, relief or issue any suitable writ as may deem fit under the circumstances of the case including the cost of the petition.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is retired employee of the respondent department, who was worked as unskilled Labour (worked charged/Contingency Paid employees). 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. 4. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not been 3 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. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 6. 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 his 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), his 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. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh