1 2026:CGHC:20853 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3856 of 2026 1 - Onkar Prasad Dewangan S/o. Tatu Ram Dewangan Aged About 63 Years Retired Mali, R/o. Ward No. 6, Village And Post Kanhe, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 2 - Manoj Kumar Soni S/o. Late Dadu Ram Aged About 51 Years R/o. Village Naretitola, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Work Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Work Department Shivnath Bhawan North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Work Department Circle Durg, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department, Division Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Public Work Department Bha/sadak Division, Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chwoki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chwoki (C.G.) 6 - Executive Engineer Public Work Department Bha/sadak Divsion, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title is taken from CIS) RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.05.11 17:38:26 +0530 2 For Petitioners : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate For Respondents-State : Ms. Apoorva Nigam, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 05/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 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 petitioners are not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioners, 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 petitioners, this petition is disposed of permitting petitioners to submit fresh representation before appropriate authority. 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 observations and directions. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi