1 2025:CGHC:5170 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 819 of 2025 1 - Shafik Mohammed S/o Shri Rajjabali Aged About 67 Years R/o Ward No. 08, Shastri Nagar Jhilmila, Tahsil Saraipalli, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, National Highway Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Zainab Mustafa Vanak, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/ State : Ms. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29/01/2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records leading to the impugned action of the respondents, for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to release the entire amount of leave encashment as entitled to the petitioner, in light of the judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court in matter of Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.-WPS No. 3870 of 2021 and other connected matters. 10.3) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is retired employee of the respondent department, who was working as Unskilled Labour in the Public Works Department. He further 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 petitioner is entitled for leave encashment. 3. Learned State counsel submits 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 period of the 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 petitioner 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 his claim. In the event of filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (Supra), his claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment of 4 Faguvaram Patel (Supra) expeditiously preferably within the period of ‘90 days’ from the date of submission of the said representation. 6. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat