1 CGHC010275092026 2026:CGHC:31631 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5549 of 2026 Smt. Tara Bai Sona W/o Harro Ram Sona Aged About 63 Years Retired Ivth Class Employee At Office Of Nagar Panchayat Pithora, District- Mahasamund, (C.G.) R/o Ward No. 10, Sweeper Colony, Pithora, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Rapur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development Department, Indrawati Bhawan New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. Collector, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Pithora, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Anil Tawadkar, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Mr. S.S. Badgaiya, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 24/07/2026 1. The petitioner, who was serving as a Class-IV employee in the Office of Nagar Panchayat, Pithora, District Mahasamund, retired from service on 31.10.2025. It is submitted that although the petitioner's leave encashment amounting to Rs.4,92,280/- has JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.07.25 11:20:16 +0530 2 already been sanctioned by the competent authority, the same has not been released despite the lapse of more than six months from the date of retirement. 2. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner was an employee of the Nagar Panchayat and, therefore, the liability to release the leave encashment amount rests upon the concerned Nagar Panchayat/Corporation. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the limited grievance raised in the present petition and taking note of the fact that the petitioner's leave encashment has already been sanctioned but remains unpaid even after a considerable period following his retirement, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner cannot be deprived of his legitimate retiral dues without any justifiable reason. 5. Though respondent No.4 has not yet entered appearance and no notice has been issued to it, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, it is directed that the competent authority of respondent No.4 shall verify the petitioner's claim and, if it is found that the leave encashment amount has already been sanctioned and there is no legal impediment to its release, the sanctioned amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner forthwith, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 3 6. It is clarified that this Court has not adjudicated upon any disputed question of fact. In the event any discrepancy is noticed during verification, it shall be open to respondent No.4 to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law after recording reasons. However, if no such impediment exists, the payment shall not be withheld any further. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti