1 2026:CGHC:8236 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1778 of 2026 1 - Gayaprasad Sahu S/o Lakhan Sahu Aged About 62 Years A Retired Work Charged Employee, R/o Village Chhirahi, Post Chuchurungpur, Tehsil Palari, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur C.G. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur C.G. 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resource Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur C.G. 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Finance, Accounts And Treasury, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dist. Raipur C.G. 5 - The Executive Engineer, Water Management Division No. 02 Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara C.G. ... Respondent(s) RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2026.02.17 11:07:38 +0530 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Anand Kumar Kujur, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 16.02.2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who stood retired as Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees is entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment to petitioner. Identical issue came up for hearing before this Court in case of Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of C.G. & Ors, in W.P.(S) No. 3870 of 2021 and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, wherein petitioners have raised identical issue which was allowed in their favour. He submits that at this stage, petitioner may be permitted to submit representation in light of Faguvaram Patel (supra) and respondents be directed to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner expeditiously, within specified time. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner, at this stage, he is having no objection. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 4. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to 3 make fresh representation. In the event, petitioner submits representation, his claim shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation keeping in mind decision in case of Faguvaram Patel (supra). 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Rukhsar