Chattisgarh High Court
Chandrika Prasad Kujur vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 February, 2025
1
RAVI
Digitally
signed by
RAVI
SHANKAR
2025:CGHC:9884
SHANKAR MANDAVI
MANDAVI Date:
2025.02.28
16:38:17
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1457 of 2025
1 - Chandrika Prasad Kujur S/o Mangal Sai Aged About 66 Years
Retired Truck Driver From Office Of Executive Engineer, Water
Resources Division No. 1 Ambikapur, R/o Village - Jajga, Tahsil -
Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)
2 - Indravati Tirkey W/o Vifan Tirkey Aged About 49 Years R/o Village -
Raghunathpur, Tahsil - Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) The Petitioner
Is Wife Of Deceased Employee Late Vifan Tirkey, Who Retired From
Office Of Executive Engineer Barnai Canal Division, Ambikapur, Since
Above Division Abolish The Service Record Handed Over To Executive
Engineer, Division No. 1, Ambikapur
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur,
District Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Engineer In Chief. Water Resprces Department Shivnath Mandal,
North Block, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur , District - Raipur,
(C.G.)
3 - Chief Engineer, Hasdeo Ganga Kachhar Water Resources
Department, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.)
4 - Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division No. 1 Ambikapur,
District Surguja,(C.G.)
2
5 - Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division , Balrampur District -
Balrampur, Ramanujganj, (Chhattisgarh)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhupendra Shrivas, Advocate
For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
27/02/2025
1. Heard Mr. Bhupendra Shrivas, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr.
Hemant Kesharwani, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as
Mr. Rishabh Bisen, 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 the direction for the respondent authorities to
grant the benefit of leave encashement."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner
No.1 and husband of petitioners No.2 were engaged as Gangman
in respondent department and they were granted salary as
monthly basis since initial date of appointment under the work
charge and contingency paid employees, as per circular issued by
state government, the services of petitioners are governed by
Chhattisgarh irrigation Department Contingency Paid Employees
Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules and upon attaining
age of superannuation the they have been retired from services.
The respondent authorities granted pension and gratuity to
petitioner after retirement, but benefit of leave encashment has
not been granted to petitioner, the respondent authorities not
count all service rendered by petitions in the department for grant
of gratuity. The petitioners are governed by the Chhattisgarh
Work-Charged / Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules, 1977
(herein after the Rules, 1977) which has been made by the
erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh and has been adopted by the
State of Chhattisgarh under the exercise of power conferred under
Article 309 of the Constitution of India, as the 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
