Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46675 (CHH)

RAMSAI NIRMALKAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/24/2025 · 2025-01-07

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:869 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 24 of 2025 1 - Ramsai Nirmalkar S/o Ramjhool Nirmalkar Aged About 69 Years Retired Tool Man Posted At OfÏce Of S.D.O. (E And M) Public Works Department Sub Division Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Krishna Kumar Rajak S/o Bahoran Rajak Aged About 65 Years Retired Mechanical Helper Posted At OfÏce Of S.D.O. (E And M) Public Works Department Sub Division Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Om Prakash Kaushik S/o Late Nem Lal Kaushik Aged About 36 Years R/o Ward No. 48 Purana Sarkanda Lodhi Para, P.S. Sarkanda District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh Mother Of Petitioner Namely Smt. Geeta Bai Kaushik Was Retired Chowkidar Posted At OfÏce Of S.D.O. (E And M) Public Works Department Sub Division Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Sihawa Bhawan New Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bilaspur Range District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer (E And M) Public Works Department, Bilaspur Division District - Bilaaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Joint Director Pension, Account And Treasury Department, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 ... Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. F. S. Khare, Advocate For Res./State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 07/01/2025 1. Heard Mr. F. S. Khare, learned counsel petitioners as well as Ms. Shailja Shukla, learned Deputy Government Advocate for State/respondent. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: 10.1 That this Hon’ble Curt may kindly be pleased to alow 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. 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 submit that petitioners were working as “work charged Contingency Paid Employees” under the respondent authorities and after completion of age of superannuation they have retired from their services but till date the respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment to petitioners. He 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 encashment and 3 respondent authorities be directed to consider the matter of the petitioners expeditiously within specified time. 4. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioners are not pressing this petition on merits and are only seeking a direction to decide the issue for grant of leave encashment, at this stage, she is having no objection. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 6. 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 the said representation. 7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE amita Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.01.14 09:03:57 +0530