Chattisgarh High Court
Shiv Kumar Kashyap vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 February, 2025
1
Digitally
signed by
2025:CGHC:8283
RAVI
RAVI SHANKAR
SHANKAR MANDAVI
MANDAVI Date:
2025.02.19
15:08:52
NAFR
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1283 of 2025
1 - Shiv Kumar Kashyap S/o Bhagat Ram Aged About 76 Years R/o
Ring Road No. 1 Gangapur, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.
2 - Brijhu Ram S/o Rupan Kujur Aged About 63 Years R/o Ward No. 16,
Ajirma, Post - Raghawpuri, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Water Resource
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt - Raipur
Chhattisgarh
2 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General
Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt -
Raipur Chhattisgarh.
3 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Finance Department,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt - Raipur Chhattisgarh.
4 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Water Resources,
Ambikapur Division, Surguja, Distt - Surguja Chhattisgarh.
5 - Executive Engineer Water Resources, Ambikapur Division No. 1,
Surguja, Distt - Surguja Chhattisgarh.
6 - Executive Engineer Water Resources, Ambikapur Division No. 2,
Surguja, Distt - Surguja Chhattisgarh.
2
7 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department,
Ambikapur Division, Surguja, Distt - Surguja Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order Sheet
18/02/2025
1. Heard Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, learned counsel petitioners as well
as Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, learned Panel Lawyer for
State/respondents.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:
"10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to direct the Respondents Authorities by
issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders,
direction/directions to grant leave encashment
and interest over it for the delay in payment of
the petitioners in the light of order dated
30.09.2022 passed in Faguvaram Patel & Ors.
Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, in WPS
No.3870 of 2021.
10.2. Any other relief, including the cost of this
petition, as it appears to be fit and appropriate to
this Hon'ble Court"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner No. 1
is retired employee of the Department of water Resources and
posted in the under the office of Superintendent Engineer,
Department of Water Resources, Ambikapur Division, Surguja,
Distt-Surguja C.G. The Petitioner No.1 was appointed as Bill
Distributor in the respondent department and retired in the years
30.06.2020, which can be ready reference from his PPO Order,
whereas, the petitioner No.2 is retired employee of the
Department of water Resources and posted in the under the office
Superintendent Engineer, Department of Water Resources
Ambikapur Division, Surguja, Distt- Surguja C.G. The petitioner
No 2 was appointed as Helper in the respondent department after
long services he retired on 30.06.2024. As per the Chhattisgarh
Work Charged And Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules,
1977, petitioners are entitled for benefits of leave encashment, as
there is no prohibition in release of leave encashment amounts to
petitioners under the Rules, therefore, leave credited in the
account of the work charged / contingency paid employees
deserved to get encashment. Learned counsel for the petitioners
further 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 petitioners 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 claim 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 their
said representation.
7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid
observations and directions.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Ravi Mandavi
