2025:CGHC:44889 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10305 of 2025 Shri Raghunandan Prasad Verma S/o Latel Ram Verma Aged About 74 Years R/o Tekari, Gandhi Chowk, Ward No. 5, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Superintending Engineer Public Works Department, Raipur Circle, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Division No. 3, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Divisional Joint Director Treasury, Accounts And Pension, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ...Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri Ujjwal Choubey, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Mayur Khandelwal, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 03.09.2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is retired employee of the Public Works Department, and was working as Work Charged Contingency paid employee. It is further submitted that in light of judgment passed by this Court in WPS-3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel, and others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and others), and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, present petitioner is also entitled for leave encashment. Wps 10305 of 2025 2 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 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 his/her claim. In that event, on due verification of service record, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), his/her claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment passed in that case, and also other applicable rules and circulars, 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