Sunita Sethiya vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 1021 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Sunita Sethiya vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 January, 2025

                                                     1




                                                                   2025:CGHC:1354


                                                                                NAFR
           Digitally
           signed by

GOURI
           GOURI
           MUDALIAR       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MUDALIAR   Date:
           2025.01.11
           11:34:46
           +0530




                                            WPS No. 104 of 2025


               Sunita Sethiya W/o Late Premnath Sethiya Aged About 44 Years R/o 8
               Gopi Patel Line Ghatpadmoor Titirgaon Distt- Bastar ( C.G. )
                                                                            ... Petitioner


                                                  versus


               1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through 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 ( bh/sa ) North Bastar
               Division No. 02 Jagdalpur Distt- Bastar ( C.G. ).


               5 - The Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department ( bh/sa )
               North Bastar Division No. 02 Jagdalpur Distt- Bastar (C.G.).
                                      2

6 - The Executive Engineer Public Public Works Department (bh/sa)
North Bastar Division No. 02 Jagdalpur Distt- Bastar ( C.G. ).
                                                       ... Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate.

For                   : Shri Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy.G.A.
Respondents/State

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board

09/01/2025

1. Heard Shri Vikash A. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Shri Suyashdhar Badgaiya, learned Deputy

Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents.

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following

relief(s):-

"(i)To issue an appropriate writ or order to direct the respondent's

authority to grant the benefits of leave encashment in favour of the

petitioner.

(ii)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 petitioner submits that petitioner is the

wife of deceased retired employee of the respondent department,

who was work charged employee working in Public Works

Department, Jagdalpur, District Bastar. 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

petitioner (wife of the deceased employee) is entitled for leave

encashment.

4. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not

been filed by the petitioner (wife of the deceased employee) and it

is also not reflected as to whether the husband (deceased

employee) of the petitioner has 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

writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner (wife of

deceased employee) 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 her claim. In the event of

filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found

to be similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram

Patel (surpa), her 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 the said representation.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid

observations and directions.

Sd/-

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE

gouri