1 2025:CGHC:9696 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1451 of 2025 1 - Nilendra Bag S/o Jailal Bag Aged About 72 Years R/o 13 Mahadevghat Gali Ward No. 03 Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. 2 - Harendra Kumar Nandi S/o Late Shanti Ranjan Nandi Aged About 66 Years R/o 1/k Maitri Sangh Gali Dr. Shyam Prashad Mukharji Ward No. 19 Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. 3 - Archana Yadav W/o Chuni Lal Yadav Aged About 50 Years R/o - 012 Tarai Para Abdul Kalam Ward Bhawani Chowk Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. 4 - Vimla Thakur W/o Late Mohan Thakur Aged About 61 Years R/o House No. 07 Prem Nagar Ward No. 08 Distt.- Sukuma C.G. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Engineer in Chief Public Works Department District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Chief Engineer (Administration) Public Works Department District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Engineer Public Works Department (Bh/sa) Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. 5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department (Bh/sa) Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. 6 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department (Bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 01 Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.03.03 19:04:01 +0530 2 7 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Sukuma Distt.- Sukuma C.G. 8 - Divisional Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension Bastar Division Jagdalpur Distt.- Bastar C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Shri Santosh Bharat, Advocate For State/Respondents : Shri Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 25/02/2025 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that he does not want to press I.A. No.1 for exemption from filing typed/legible copy of documents as typed and legible copy of the documents have already been filed. I.A. No.1 is dismissed is not pressed. 2. By this petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs: “10.1 To issue an appropriate writ or order to direct the respondent's authority to grant the benefits of leave encashment in favour of the petitioners. 10.2 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances including award of cost of the petition may also be granted.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are retired employees/legal heirs of the deceased employees. The deceased employees and rest of the petitioners were initially working as field assistant/driver in the Public Works Department. After completion of age of superannuation, they retired from the services as regular employees. The respondents authorities granted pension and gratuity, but, benefit of leave encashment is not granted to the petitioners. It is the claim of the petitioners that in light of the judgment 3 passed by this Court on 30.9.2022 in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected matters, the petitioners are entitled for leave encashment. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioners and it is also not reflected as to whether the deceased employees and rest of the petitioners had completed the minimum period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 5. I have heard the arguments raised on behalf of the parties and perused the documents available. 6. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on merits of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate their claim. In the event of filing of the representation, on due verification, if the petitioners are found to be similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), their claim shall be decided by the respondents authorities in light of the judgment of Faguvaram Patel (supra) expeditiously preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of submission of the said representation. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Gopal Singh