1 2025:CGHC:5586 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 864 of 2025 1 - Kripa Ram Dewangan S/o Sahasu Ram Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Tikri, Post Arjunda, Tehsil Arjunda, District Balod Chhattisgarh 2 - Khorbahara Ram S/o Hira Ram Aged About 71 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Village Tikri, Post Arjunda, Tehsil Arjunda, District Balod Chhattisgarh 3 - Latkhor Ram S/o Thanvar Aged About 70 Years R/o Ward No. 02, Village Gureda, Post Gureda, Tehsil Gunderdehi, District Balod Chhattisgarh 4 - Chiman Lal Deshmukh S/o Ganga Prasad Deshmukh Aged About 66 Years R/o Village Tirga, Post Tirga, Tehsil Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh 5 - Kaushilya Bai W/o Suklu Ram Aged About 67 Years R/o Ward No. 06, Village Tirga, Post Tirga, Tehsil Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 Finance, Accounts And Treasury, Govt. Of Chhttisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Division Balod, Dist. Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioners :- Mr. Anand Kumar Kujur, Advocate For State :- Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 30.01.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- “10.(i) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for all the records pertaining to the case. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent authorities to grant the benefits of leave encashment to work charged and contingency employees on their retirement in accordance with the statutory rules, regulations and circulars issued by the respondent authorities and also based on the judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court on 30.09.2022, in WPS No. 3870/2021. (iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent authorities to take appropriate decision within a reasonable period of time on the requests and representations preferred by the petitioners in accordance with the law and also based on the judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court on 30.09.2022, in WPS No. 3870/2021 3 to grant the benefits of leave encashment to work charged and contingency employees on their retirement. (iv) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction similar to the order passed in WPS No. 3732/2023 passed on 06.07.2023 to the respondent authorities to immediately process the claim of all similarly placed persons in the light of the aforesaid decision of this High Court on the same subject-matter, within an outer limit of 120 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order. (v) That any other relief/order which may be deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are retired employees of the respondent department, who were working as class-IV employees in the Public Works Department. 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 were entitled for leave encashment. 3. 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 the service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 4 5. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed off 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 (supra), his 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. 6. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed off with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha