1 2026:CGHC:19915 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3690 of 2026 1 - Baldev Gond S/o Sitaram Aged About 63 Years Retired Labour, R/o Ward No. 04, Basantpur, Post Office Basantpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Rajkumari Yadav W/o Late Nankoo Yadav Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Basantpur, Post Basantpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Sukman Soyma W/o Late Raila Soyma Aged About 58 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Jamai, Basantpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (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 Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent Engineer Public Work Department Circle Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.05.01 11:59:00 +0530 2 5 - Executive Engineer Public Work Department Bha/ Sadak Division Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Aakash Singh, Advocate For State/Respondents : Ms. Apoorva Nigam, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 29/04/2026 1. Petitioners 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. Learned 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 3 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) Judge Ravi Mandavi