1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10281 of 2025 1 - Sita Namdev W/o Late Shri S.P. Namdev Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 502, Sanjay Nagar, Chakradhar Nagar Chowk, Ward No. 25, District- Raigarh C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G. 2 - Engineer-In-Chief, Department Of Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Atal Nagar, Sector 19, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G. 3 - Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Circle Raigarh, District Raigarh C.G. 4 - Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Zone-Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Executive Engineer Raigarh, Public Health Engineering (P.H.E.), Raigarh, District Raigarh C.G. 6 - Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Accounts And Pensions Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, C.G. 7 - Treasury Officer, District Treasury Raigarh, District Raigarh C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 02/09/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is the wife of the deceased employee and the deceased is retired employee of the respondents’ Departments and was working as Work Charged ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.09.03 12:08:57 +0530 2 Contingency paid employee. 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 deceased 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 her claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), her 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 Alok