Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13085 (CHH)

RAMESH KUMAR SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/2376/2026 · 2026-03-11

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 2026:CGHC:11793 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2376 of 2026 1 - Ramesh Kumar Sahu S/o Late Punit Ram Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o House No. - 180, Ward No.- 12, Khaspara, Kottara, District- North Baster, Kanker (C.G.) 2 - Maya Ram Jain S/o Late Fulchand Jain Aged About 62 Years R/o Kirgoli, Post- Murdongari, House No.- 124, Kanker, District- North Baster, Kanker (C.G.) 3 - Hari Ram Gota S/o Late Kangloo Ram Gota Aged About 67 Years R/o House No. - 902, Ward No.- 11, R.E.S. Colony, Charama, District- North Baster, Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department (B And R), District- North Baster, Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate For State : Ms. Sakshi Bajpai, panel lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.03.12 14:02:27 +0530 2 / 3 12.03.2026 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 representation to be submitted by petitioner, at this stage, she 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). 3 / 3 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza