1 2026:CGHC:20847 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3873 of 2026 1 - Smt. Kunjamma Samuel W/o Late Daniel Samuel Aged About 69 Years R/o 112 Ward No.02 Dantewada N.P. Distt. North Bastar Dantewada C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Public Works Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Chief Engineer (Administration) Public Works Department District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar C.G. 5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar C.G. 6 - The Executive Engineer P.W.D. Division South Bastar Dantewada Distt. South Bastar Dantewada C.G. 7 - Divisional Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension Bastar Division Jagdalpur Distt.Bastar 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 Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Shahil Singh, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 05/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is wife of deceased employee who initially appointed as a Field Assistant, subsequently the services of petitioners husband was regularized and stood retired from the said post and therefore, 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 therein 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, he is having no objection. 3 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 petitioner to submit fresh representation before appropriate authority. In the event, petitioner submits representation, his 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