1 2025:CGHC:3346 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 463 of 2025 1 - Ratiram S/o Late Mangluram Aged About 64 Years Retired Vehicle Driver Posted At Office Of S.D.O. (E And M) Light Machinery Nalkoop And Gate Sub Division Jagdalpur Water Resources Department, District Jagdalpur Bastar Chhattisgarh 2 - Lay Singh S/o Late Uday Singh Aged About 67 Years Retired Chowkidar Posted At Office Of Superintending Engineer Indravati Pariyojna Mandal Jagdalpur Water Resources Department District Jagdalpur Bastar Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Chandra Bai W/o Moti Lal Aged About 65 Years Retired Sweeper Posted At Office Of Executive Engineer T.D.P.P. Jal Sanshadhan Division Jagdalpur Water Resources Department District Jagdalpur Bastar Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Water Resources Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Enigneer In Chief Water Resources Department, Sihawa Bhawan New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godavari Kachhar Raipur Department Of Water Resources District Raipur Chhattisgarh RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.01.28 12:08:29 +0530 2 4 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Pariyojna Water Resources Department Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Executive Engineer (E And M) Light Machinery Nalkoop And Gate Division Jagdalpur Water Resources Department, District Jagdalpur Bastar Chhattisgarh 6 - Superintending Engineer Indravati Pariyojna Mandal Jagdalpur Water Resources Department District Jagdalpur Bastar Chhattisgarh 7 - Executive Engineer T.D.P.P. Jal Sanshadhan Division Jagdalpur Water Resources Department District Jagdalpur Bastar Chhattisgarh 8 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department Bastar Division, District Bastar Chhattisgarh 9 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department Raipur Division, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Nilu Kumari Singh, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 20/01/2025 1. Heard Ms. Nilu Kumari Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Khulesh Sahu, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent/s. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition and be pleased to issue an order/direction to the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of leave encashment to the petitioners. 3 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be call for the records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioner's matter. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respective petitioners/employees were working as work charged Contingency Paid employees in the Water Resources Department. Initially they were employed on temporary basis, thereafter their services were regularized. The petitioners after completion of age of superannuation retired from service. The respondent authorities granted pension and gratuity to the petitioners but benefit of leave encashment is not granted to them. It is further submitted that the rules of payment of leave encashment is governed by the M.P. Work- charged /contingency. Paid Employees Leave Rules 1977, which has been made by erstwhile State of Madhay Pradesh and has been adopted by the state of C.G. under the exercise of power conferred under article 309 of Constitution of India. The petitioners are entitle for benefit of leave encashment as per provision of rule, 1977, but the said benefits have not been extended in favour of the petitioners, in illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory manner. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) and other connected matters decided on 30.09.2022, the petitioners are entitled for leave 4 encashment. Learned State counsel 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 learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 5. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority within the period of ‘30 days’ from the date of receipt of 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 (surpa), their claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) expeditiously preferably within the period of ‘90 days’ from the date of submission of their said representation. 6. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi