1 2026:CGHC:17988 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3394 of 2026 1 - Smt. Dhankunwar Rajwade W/o Late Karmu Ram Aged About 75 Years (Legal Heirs Of Late Karmu Ram Peon) At Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (B./r.), Division Ambikapur, District Surguka, (C.G.), R/o Village Chitabahar, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works, Nirman Bhawan, North Block, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department (B./r.), Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department (B./r.), Division Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Prabhu Lal, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Shahil Singh, Panel Lawyer 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 initailly appointed as Work Charged Employees in respondent department in the year 1976 and after retirement died in the year 2020, therefore, petitioenrs’ husband 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, her 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