Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13639 (CHH)

YADRAM YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA

WPS/2879/2026 · 2026-03-29

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 2 2026:CGHC:14719 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2879 of 2026 Yadram Yadav S/o Bholaram Yadav Aged About 56 Years Constable, G. D. No. 810480147, C R P F, Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - Union Of India Through Director General Of Police C G O Complex Road, New Delhi, District- New Delhi, Delhi 2 - Inspector General Of Police Through Central Reserve Police Force, Office Of Inspector General Of Police, C R P F Agartala Tripura, Tripura 3 - Commandant 188 Battalion C R P F Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Niraj Baghel, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 30/03/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) to direct the respondents to sanctioned and grant Earned Leave/Leave Encashment of 300 days to the petitioner; ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG 2 / 2 10.2 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Writ(s)/Order(s)/Direction(s) to direct the respondents to grant interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of Earned Leave/Leave Encashment which remained unpaid since the date of retirement of the petitioner; 10.3 Any other relief, which the Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper according to the facts and circumstances of the case along with the cost of the petition.” 2. At the outset learned counsel for petitioner submits that he is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking permission to submit fresh representation before respondent authorities and direction be issued to concerned authority to consider and take decision on the representation to be submitted at the earliest within specified time frame. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that in view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of submission made by learned counsel for respective parties, without commenting any thing on the merits of the case, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation before Respondent No. 3 and in the event petitioner submits such a representation, Respondent No. 3 shall consider and take decision on the representation to be submitted by petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 03 months from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge alfiza