1 / 3 2026:CGHC:2329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 371 of 2026 1 - Nand Kumar Nishad S/o Late Shri Samaroo, Aged About 63 Years Retired Akushal Shramik Karyalay Karyapalan Abhiyanta Rashtriya Rajmarg Sambhag Lo.Ni.Vi. Raipur, R/o Bajrang Chouk, Rajendra Nagar, B.T.S. Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur C.G. 2 - Smt. Tulsha Bai W/o Shri Bamana Taandi, Aged About 63 Years Retired Akushal Shramik Karyalay Karyapalan Abhiyanta Rashtriya Rajmarg Sambhag Lo.Ni.Vi. Raipur, R/o Budhhi Mata Chouk, Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur C.G. 3 - Dhaneshwar Kashhyap S/o Late Shri Bhukhasinggh Kashyap, Aged About 63 Years Retired Akushal Shramik Karyalay Karyapalan Abhiyanta Rashtriya Rajmarg Sambhag Lo.Ni.Vi. Raipur, R/o Makan No. 211, Ward No. 9, Mokhaguda, Katlimuda, District Gariyaband C.G. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Sachiv, Lok Nirman Vibhag, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Chief Engineer, Lok Nirman Vibhag, Nirman North Block, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Chief Engineer, Lok Nirman Vibhag, Rashtriya Rajmarg Vibhag, Raipur District Raipur C.G. ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.01.15 11:06:43 +0530 2 / 3 4 - Executive Engineer, Office Of Executive Engineer, Rashtriya Rajmarg Sambhag, Raipur District Raipur C.G. 5 - Joint Director, Kosh, Lekha Avm Pension, Raipur Sambhag, District Raipur C.G. 6 - Sub Divisional Officer, Karyalay Rashtriya Rajmarg Anuvibhag No. 1, Lok Nirman Vibhag, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Rajendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 14/01/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners who stood retired as Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees are entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment to petitioners. 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 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 petitioners are not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to decide the 3 / 3 representation to be submitted by petitioners, 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 petitioners, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioners to make fresh representation. In the event, petitioners submit representation, their 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 observation and direction. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza