Chattisgarh High Court
Sombai Jami vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 February, 2025
1
RAVI
Digitally
signed by
RAVI
SHANKAR
2025:CGHC:9873
SHANKAR MANDAVI
MANDAVI Date:
2025.02.28
16:38:17
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1467 of 2025
1 - Sombai Jami W/o Laleya Jami Aged About 60 Years R/o Pawaras
Ward No. 14 Distt. Sukuma C.G.
2 - Chandramani Sethiya W/o Ajaman Singh Sethiya Aged About 53
Years R/o House No. 22 Shabari Nagar Ward No. 12 Distt. Sukuma
C.G.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Public Works Department,
Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur
(C.G.)
2 - The Engineer In Chief, Public Works Department, District Raipur
(C.G.)
3 - The Chief Engineer (Administration) Public Works Department,
District Raipur (C.G.)
4 - The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Jagdalpur Distt.
Bastar C.G.
5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department Jagalpur
Distt. Bastar C.G.
6 - The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (Bh/sa) Sukuma
Division Distt. Sukuma C.G.
2
7 - Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Account And Pension Bastar
Division Jagdalpur Distt. Bastar C.G.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate
For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajeet Singh, GA
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
27/02/2025
1. Heard Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the
petitioners as well as Mr. Ajeet Singh, learned Government
Advocate for State/respondents.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for
following reliefs:
"10.1 To issue an appropriate writ or order to
direct the respondent's authority to grant the
benefits of leave encashment in favour of the
petitioners.
10.2. Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and
circumstances including award of cost of the
petition may also be granted."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are
the legal representative of deceased employee who was working
under the respondent department and the instant petition is being
preferred for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider
the case of petitioners for extending the benefits of leave
encashment as per provisions of C.G. Work Charged
/Contingency Paid Employee Leave Rules 1977. The deceased
employee were initially appointed under the respondent No.1
department and upon attaining age of superannuation the they
have been retired from services as regular employee. After
retirement/death the respondent authorities have released the
pension and gratuity in favour of the deceased employee but the
benefits of leave encashment have not been extended in favour of
petitioners, therefore they prayed for payment of leave
encashment is governed by M.P. Work/Charged Contingency paid
Employee Leave Rules 1977, 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
