1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9880 of 2025 1 - Ravi Kumar Vaishnav S/o Late Dharam Das Vaishnav Aged About 33 Years (Legal Heirs Of Late Dharam Das Vaishnav Chowkidar) At Executive Engineer Water Resource Survey And Barrage Construction Division No. 1, Kharsia District - Raigarh (C.G.) R/o Hasdeo Bango Colony Thusekela, Kharsia Tahsil Kharsia District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Water Resource Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Water Resource Department Sihawa Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Department Of Water Resources Hasdeo Kachhar Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Survey And Barrage Construction Division No. 1, Kharsia District - Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jeet Ram Patel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.08.23 11:11:37 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 22/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner who is the son of the deceased employee namely Late Dharam Das Vaishnav who was retired employee of the respondents’ Departments and was working as Work Charged Contingency paid employee and he has died in the year of 2025 while he was in service. 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 petitioner is also entitled for leave encashment. 2. Learned State counsel would submit 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 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 petitioner 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 his claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly 3 situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), his 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