1 2025:CGHC:43528 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9663 of 2025 1 - Sudhaker Mahadev Rao Patne S/o Late Shri Mahadev Rao Patne Aged About 69 Years Occupation - Retired Work Charged Driver, Public Health Engineering Department, R/o Ward No.-42, Road No.-5, Azad Chowk, Kasarideeh, Durg, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Health Engineering, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 492002 2 - Chief Engineer Public Health Engineering Department, Indravati Bhawan, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer (E And M) Public Health Engineering Department, Sub Division - Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Atul Pandey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 28.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the following relief:- SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.08.30 13:16:56 +0530 2 10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased direct the respondent No. 2 to decide the pending application dated 11.12.2023 of the petitioner for grant of leave encashment with interest. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant the leave encashment with interest for the delay caused. 10.3 That, any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the present facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would restricted his submission that with respect to his claim of leave encashment, he may be permitted to move fresh representation to the Respondent no. 2 & 3 raising his grievance and the Respondent No. 2 & 3 may be directed to decide his representation in accordance with law within the stipulated time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/ State would submit that he has no objection if such a direction is being given to the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to take the decided the representation made by the petitioner, in accordance with law. 4. Considering the limited submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to move his fresh representation before the Respondent No. 2 & 3 along with the copy of this order and in the eventuality of moving the representation to the Respondent No. 2 & 3, the Respondent No. 2 & 3 is directed to to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law and also in view of the applicable rules and circulars holding the filed within the period of 90 days for the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika