1 2025:CGHC:45941 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10566 of 2025 • Jagdish Prasad S/o Late. Lallu Ram, Aged About 63 Years Retired - Sweeper, Office Of Municipal Council Bagbahra, R/o - Ward No. 3, Main Road, Thanapara, Bagbahra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Urban Administration And Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Directorate Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3. Collector, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 4. Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Bagbahra, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Anil Tawaddkar, Advocate. For Respondent/State. : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order Sheet 2 09/09/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of appropriate writ of mandamus and certiorari and for other suitable writs and directions. 2. Petitioner who was working on the post of Sweeper in Municipal Council Bagbahara , District Mahasamund stood retired on 31-10-2022 and his leave encashment has not been released to him by the respondent No.2 after lapse of near about three years. 3. After lapse of near about 3 years, leave encashment of the petitioner has not been paid to him though sanctioned which shows the consideration of the respondent authorities with regard to low paid employees which this Court deprecated excuse of the authority. 4. Learned counsel for the Corporation would submit that there is financial crisis, therefore, they are unable to pay the leave encashment within the stipulated time period and would further submit that they will release the leave encashment within two months. 5. The aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the corporation is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that for the last near about three, years the petitioner has to run pillar to post to get his leave encashment amount and would submit that penal re-provisions may also be invoked by this court by imposing interest on delayed payment. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Considering the submission and fact that though the leave encashment amount sanctioned, the same has not been paid to the petitioner for near about 3 years, though this is a fit case where penal interest can be imposed, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the respondent authority is having some financial crisis, no penal interest is imposed, but it is directed that within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, leave encashment amount shall be released to the petitioner without any delay. 3 8. It is made clear that if the respondent authority fails to comply with the order, then it will be viewed seriously by this court. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition (s) is disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Raju RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.09.10 11:10:49 +0530