1 2025:CGHC:5989 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 951 of 2025 1 - Kumari Bai Gandharv W/o Late Rambharos Gandharv Aged About 56 Years R/o House No. 44, Ward No. 13, Malhar District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Public Works Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Engineer In Chief Pwd Nirman Bhawan North Block Sector - 19 Capital Complex Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District - Raipur 492002 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department Office Front Of District - Court Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Superintending Engineer Public Works Department Bilaspur Circle Office Front Of District Court Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department Block No. 1 Bilaspur Office District Court Area Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Collector Bilaspur Collectorate Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Divisional Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pensions Bilaspur Division Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.02.05 15:17:25 +0530 2 (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Yash Verma, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 03/02/2025 1. Heard Mr. Yash Verma, learned counsel petitioner as well as Mr. Rishabh Bisen, learned Panel Lawyer for State/respondents. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Writ(s)/Order(s)/Direction(s) to direct the respondents to grant the unpaid amount of leave encashment as per the rules and grant consequential reliefs thereof. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Writ(s)/Order(s)/Direction(s) to direct the respondents to grant interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of leave encashment which remained unpaid since the date of retirement of the petitioner. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper according to the facts and circumstances of the case along with the cost of the petition.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner initially started to work as unskilled labour at District 3 Bilaspur since 01.04.1978 in the respondent department. Subsequently on the 01.04.1978 service of the petitioner's husband were absorbed in the work charged / contingency paid employee establishment vide order only after recommendation of Divisional Scrutiny Committee as the petitioner has completed 10 years in service in collector rate as per the rules. The husband of the petitioner subsequently stood superannuated 31.05.2016 after completion of 38 years in service. Despite repeated request the respondent department has not released the due amount of leave encashment which the retired work charged / contingency paid employee is entitled as per the M.P./C.G. Work Charged / Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules, 1977. The petitioner's husband (Rambharos Gandharv) has died on dated 18-10-2020, which led to petitioner become the legal representative of her husband and she is also entitled for all the benefits on the behalf of her husband which he was entitled at the time of retirement. During his service, the petitioner has performed his duties and obligations bestowed upon him with utmost sincerity and to the best of his capabilities with an unblemished service record. 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 petitioner is entitled for leave encashment. 4 4. 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 service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 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 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 her claim. In the event of filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (surpa), her 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 Ravi Mandavi