Chattisgarh High Court
Parbhaker Shende vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 February, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:7678
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1194 of 2025
1 - Parbhaker Shende S/o Late Shri, S.R. Shende Aged About 62 Years R/o. I/3,
P.W.D. Colony, Kanker, Thana, Tahsil And District- North Bastar, Kanker, ( C.G. )
( His Name Wrongly Mentioned As Prabhakar In Annexure P-1 )
2 - Vimal Ram S/o Late Shri Sugundas Aged About 64 Years R/o House No. 32,
Sadkpara, Kulgaon Thana, Tahsil And District- North Baster, Kanker ( C.G. ).
3 - Shyamsunder S/o Late Shri Bagawansing Sinha Aged About 65 Years R/o Ward
No. - 03, Kanker District- North Baster, Kanker ( C.G. ).
4 - Khem Ram Rajak S/o Late Shri Dasrath Rajak Aged About 62 Years R/o
Jawahar Ward No.- 3 Kanker, District- North Baster, Kanker ( C.G. ).
5 - Ramavatar Soni S/o Late Shri, Rangdev Soni Aged About 68 Years R/o 76
Bichpara, Dhanora, Dudhawa, Kanker District- North Baster, Kanker ( C.G. ).
6 - Rupdhar Yadav S/o Late Shri M.R. Yadav Aged About 70 Years R/o Village And
Post- Aaurgaon, Awaspara, District-- North Baster, Kanker. ( C.G. ).
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary,, Public Works Department
Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.).
2 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Kanker, District- North
Baster, Kanker (C.G.).
3 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Bhanupratapur, District- North
Baster, Kanker (C.G.).
4 - The Executive Engineer National Highway, Public Works Department, Jagdalpur
District- Baster At Jagdalpur (C.G.).
5 - Sub Divisonal Officer National Highway Sub- Division- Kanker, District- North
Baster, (C.G.).
... Respondent(s)
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate
For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer
Digitally
signed
by
SHAYNA
KADRI
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
13/02/2025
1. Heard Mr. Somkant Verma, learned counsel petitioners as well as
Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, learned Panel Lawyer for
State/respondents.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for
following reliefs:
"10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be
pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby
directing the respondent authorities to grant the
benefit of leave encashment of 120 days to the
petitioners as per the order dated 30.09.2022
passed by this Hon'ble court in identical case
(Faguvaram Patel & others Vs State of
Chhattisgarh), within stipulated.
10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are
entitled for leave encashment of 120 days from the department.
Petitioners were appointed under establishment of Work Charged
Contingency Paid Employee, they joined service under same
scheme and retired from service from different place of posting
and posts, they completed requisite length of service for
calculation of pension. During their service, the Petitioners have
performed their duties and obligations bestowed upon them with
utmost sincerity and to the best of their capabilities with an
unblemished service record. He submits that in the light of
judgment passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of
2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh &
Ors.) and other connected matters decided on 30.09.2022, the
petitioners are entitled for leave encashment.
4. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not
been filed by the petitioner and it is also not reflected as to
whether the petitioners have completed the minimum period of
service to avail the benefit of leave encashment.
5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the
documents available in record.
6. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this
petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make
detailed representation before the concerned respondent /
competent authority within the period of '30 days' from the date of
receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to
substantiate their claim. In the event of filing of representation, on
due verification, if the petitioners are found to be similarly situated
persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (surpa), their claims
shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment of
Faguvaram Patel (Supra) expeditiously preferably within the
period of '90 days' from the date of submission of the said
representation.
7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid
observations and directions.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Shayna
