1 2026:CGHC:20097 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3769 of 2026 1 - Mahesh Singh Nag S/o Raipal Singh Nag Aged About 63 Years R/o 122 Khaspara Ward No. 04 Aadawal Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 2 - Astu Ram Yadav S/o Chamru Yadav Aged About 63 Years R/o Khaspar Bhond Distt. Bastar (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The 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, (Bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 02 Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department (Bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 02 Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 6 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department (Bh/sa) North Bastar Division No. 02 Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar (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 system) For Petitioners : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Apurva Nigam, P.L. SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 30/04/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners stood retired as Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees, are BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 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 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 petitioner expeditiously within specified time. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as petitioners are not pressing this petition on merits and are only seeking a direction to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner/s, he 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 petitioners, this petition is disposed of permitting petitioners to submit fresh representation. 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. C.C. as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram