1 2026:CGHC:20378 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3799 of 2026 1 - Heera Lal Sahu S/o Mukut Ram Sahu Aged About 62 Years R/o Village -Hatpan, Ward No.07 ,post Sondh, Tahsil Berla, District Bemetara (C.G.) 2 - Dau Ram Sahu Sukul Sahu Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Hatpan Post Sondh Tahsil Berla, District Bemetera (C.G.) 3 - Hem Lal Sahu S/o Nathu Ram Sahu Aged About 62 Years R/o Village And Post Kushmi, Ward No.11, Tahsil And District Bemetara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer -In -Chief Public Warks Department Mantralaya Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Durg Division District -Durg (C.G.) 4 - The Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pension Durg Division, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Hari Om Rai, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.05.04 19:18:14 +0530 2 Order on Board 01/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were working under the respondent No.1 as Class-IV employee and upon completion of age of superannuation, they have been retired from services, and therefore, 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 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 petitioners are 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. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 3 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 before appropriate authority. 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. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi