1 / 2 2026:CGHC:15793 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3011 of 2026 1 - Ram Prasad Netam S/o Kishun Netam, Aged About 62 Years Retired Labour, R/o Village Silka, Premnagar, District Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Amraso, W/o Late Jit Singh, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Palka, District Surguja (C.G.) 3 - Amir Sai, S/o Pradhan Sandilya, Aged About 66 Years Retired Labour, R/o Village Rikhi, Police Station Udaypur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary,, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay Nava Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief, Public Work Department, North Block Sector 19 Nirman Bhawan Nawa Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Work Department Circle Ambikapur, District Ambikapur (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent Engineer, Public Work Department Circle Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer, Public Work Department Bha/ Sadak Division Surajpur District Surajpur (C.G.) 6 - Executive Engineer, Public Work Department Bha/sadak Division Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, P.L. HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE 2 / 2 ORDER ON BOARD 07.04.2026 1. petitionerss have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: “10.1) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue the direction for the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of gratuity. 10.2) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue the direction for the respondents' authorities to grant interest on delay payment of gratuity. 10.3) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant.” 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is covered with the decision passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 378 of 2016 and other connected matters. Petitioners had submitted representation before respondent No. 3 to 5, which is pending consideration and therefore, at this stage, direction be issued to respondent No. 3 to 5 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioners, at the earliest, in the light of the decision of Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 378 of 2016. 3. Counsel for the State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioners, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of submission of counsel for the parties, writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioners to submit fresh representation before respondent No. 3 to 5 with all supporting documents and in the event such representation is submitted, respondent No. 3 to 5 shall consider and decide the representation, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within further period of three months from the date of receipt of the Order, keeping in mind the decision of Division Bench of this Court passed in WA No. 378 of 2016. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Saurabh JUDGE