1 2026:CGHC:18014 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3425 of 2026 1 - Murari Lal Dixena S/o Shri Jarhu Ram Aged About 63 Years Retired Sthal Sahayak At Executive Engineer, Water Resource Division Korba District Korba, C.G., R/o Ward No. 09, Shanti Nagar, Pali, Tahsil Pali, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resource, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Water Rersource, Shivnath Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Engineer Water Resource Department Hasdeo Kachhar Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Division Korba, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Prabhu Lal, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Shahil Singh, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.04.25 10:47:58 +0530 2 Order on Board 21/04/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Work Charged Employees in respondent department and regularized in the year 1988. On attaining age of superannuation, retired in the year 2025, therefore, petitioner 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., in W.P.(S) No. 3870 of 2021 decided on 30.09.2022, wherein petitioners therein have raised identical issue which was allowed in their favour. He submits that at this stage, petitioners may be permitted to submit representation in light of Faguvaram Patel (supra) and respondents be directed to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioners 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, he is having no objection. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 3 4. Taking into consideration, the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of permitting petitioner to submit fresh representation before appropriate authority. In the event, petitioner submit such 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 petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi