1 2025:CGHC:42882 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9925 of 2025 1 - Kamta Ram Ahir S/o Bisahuram Ahir Aged About 67 Years R/o Village - Pendrikhurd, Post - Dokrabhata, Tahsil - Khairagarh District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 491885 ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Engineer-In-Chief Department of Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Atal Nagar, Sector 19, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Engineer Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Durg Circle, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Engineer Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.) Durg Circle, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Executive Engineer Bemetara, Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 6 - Divisional Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pensions - Durg Division, District Durg Chhattisgarh 7 - Treausry Officer District Treausry Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Rameshwari Kumari, Advocate. For State-Respondents : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 25-08-2025 1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner stood retired as Work Charged/Contingency Paid Employee. The petitioner was entitled for Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN 2 leave encashment but till date the respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment. She stated that an identical issue has already been decided by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) on 30.09.2022. In the light of Faguvaram (supra) the petitioner has raised identical issue which may be allowed. She submits that at this stage the petitioner may be permitted to submit detailed representation before the respondents/competent authority, who, in turn, may be directed to consider and decide the same expeditiously within specific period as fixed by this Court. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner, at this stage the State is having no objection. 3. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available on record. 4. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits this petition is disposed of in the light of judgment passed in Faguvaram Patel (Supra) reserving liberty to the petitioner to make detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority. In the event, the petitioner submits representation, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with the relevant rules and law and after verification of the service records of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within the period of 'three months' from the date of receipt of the such representation keeping in mind the decision passed in Faguvaram Patel (Supra). 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil