2025:CGHC:44566 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10269 of 2025 1 - Kripal Ram Nishad S/o Late Shri Sakha Ram Nishad Aged About 62 Years R/o 206, Village - Khudmuda, Post- Sankra, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Joharu Sahu S/o Late Shri Padruram Sahu Aged About 62 Years R/o 398, Thakur Dev Para, Bhatagaon, Post- Sundar Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantalaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Engineer-In-Chief Public Health Engineering Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Superntending Engineer Public Health Engineering, Near Khalsa School Pandri Circle Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer P.H.E. Division, Near Khalsa School Pandri Circle Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Director Treasury, Account And Pension Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ...Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioners : Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms Anuja Sharma, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 02.09.2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are retired employees of the Public Health Engineering Department, and were working as Work Charged Contingency paid employees. It is further submitted that in light of judgment passed by this Court in WPS-3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel, and others Vs State Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.09.04 11:10:03 +0530 Wps 10269 of 2025 2 of Chhattisgarh and others), and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, present petitioners are also entitled for leave encashment. 2. Learned State counsel would submit that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioners, and it is also not reflected as to whether the petitioners have 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 petitioners to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondent/ competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate their claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioners are found to be similarly situated persons as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), their 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, petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma