Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4272 (CHH)

SANGAM DAS v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/468/2025 · 2025-01-17

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:3262 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 468 of 2025 1 - Sangam Das S/o Mahettar Das Aged About 63 Years R/o H.P.T.M. 7 Sichai Colony Rampur Pali District - Korba (C.G.) 495667 2 - Shivadhar Patel S/o Pach Ram Patel Aged About 63 Years R/o A- 04 Hasdev Bango Colony Thusekela Kharsia Telikot District - Raigarh (C.G.) 496661 3 - Shashikant Sahu S/o Late Chaitram Sahu Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No- 9 Sahu Mohalla Vtc Dongri Po Baloda District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) 495559 ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary General Administration Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Naya Raipur Tehsil And District - Raipur (C.G.) 492002 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Water Resource Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Naya Raipur Tehsil And District - Raipur (C.G.) 492002 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Finance Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Naya Raipur Tehsil And District - Raipur (C.G.) 492002 4 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department Bilaspur Division District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Engineer In Chief Water Resources Department Sihawa Bhawan New Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Executive Engineer E And M Minimata Bango Division Machadoli Headquarter Katghora District - Korba (C.G.) ... Respondents Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.02.11 21:31:34 +0530 2 (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : None For State/Respondents : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17/01/2025 1. By filing this petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1.That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue Writ(s)/Order(s)/ Direction(s) calling for the entire records relating to the Petitioners' case for its kind perusal. 10.2.That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue Writ(s)/ Order(s)/ Direction(s) declaring the Petitioners entitled for the benefits of leave encashment accruing to them after regularisation of their services. 10.3.That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue Writ(s) Order(s)/ Direction(s) against the respondent authorities to grant the benefits of leave encashment to the Petitioners. 10.4.Any other Relief(s)/ Direction(s)/ Order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the petitioners' case may be granted in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice.” 2. No one appeared for the petitioners. As projected in the petition, the petitioners are retired employees. They were working as charged employees in the Water Resources Department/respondent. It is their claim that in light of the judgment passed by this Court on 30.9.2022 in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 3 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected matters, the petitioners are entitled for leave encashment. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits 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 period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 4. I have heard the arguments raised and perused the documents available. 5. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on merits of the case, the instant writ 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 a copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate their claim. In the event of filing of representation, 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 authorities in light of the judgment of Faguvaram Patel (supra) expeditiously preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of submission of the said representation. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Gopal Singh