Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15098 (CHH)

SMT. PURNIMA PAIKRA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/190/2026 · 2026-01-11

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 2026:CGHC:1631 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 190 of 2026 Smt. Purnima Paikra W/o Late Shrawan Paikra Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Khairwar, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resource Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgasrh. 2 - Engineer In Chief Water Resource Department Shivnath Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Hasdev Ganga Kachhar, Water Resource Department Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Department Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For State : Mrs. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.01.12 17:53:24 +0530 2 / 3 12/01/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who stood retired as Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees 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 have raised identical issue which was allowed in their favour. He submits that at this stage, petitioner may be permitted to submit representation in light of Faguvaram Patel (supra) and respondents be directed to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner 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, 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 petitioner, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make fresh representation. In the event, petitioner submit 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). 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