Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Deena Ram Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 759 Chatt

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 759 Chatt
Judgement Date : 25 July, 2025

Chattisgarh High Court

Deena Ram Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 July, 2025

Digitally signed by
V PADMAVATHI
Date: 2025.07.28
10:41:15 +0530




                                                                                       2025:CGHC:36327
                                                                                                            NAFR
                         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                                  WPS No. 7554 of 2025

         1 - Deena Ram Sahu S/o Late Abhay Ram Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o Village-
         Bhaismuri, Tahsil - Kurud, Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         2 - Heera Singh Sahu S/o Late Phool Ji Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o Ward No. 7, Gandhi
         Chowk, Kurud, Tahsil - Kurud, Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         3 - Mayaram Nirmalkar S/o Late Guharam Nirmalkar Aged About 70 Years R/o Village-
         Biretara, Post- Doma, Tahsil And Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         4 - Mithai Lal Verma S/o Late Naumeedeen Verma Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Po-
         Bhathgaon, Tahsil - Kurud, Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         5 - Ramswaroop S/o Late Gayaram Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Charmudiya,
         Tahsil - Kurud, Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         6 - Ramgulal Gond S/o Late Kartik Ram Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Nawagaon, Po -
         Rudri, Tahsil And Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         7 - Panch Ram Sahu S/o Late Pusau Ram Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Junwani,
         Tahsil - Bhakhara, Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)

         8 - Khilesh Sahu S/o Late Manrakhan Ram Sahu Aged About 62 Years R/o Ward No. - 14
         Bhatheli. Tahsil - Bhakhara, Distt.- Dhamtari (C.G.)             ... Petitioner(s)

                                                             versus

         1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Dept. Of General Administration,
         Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.)

         2 - The Secretary Dept Of Finance, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.)

         3 - The Secretary Dept. Of Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur
         (C.G.)

         4 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Pariyojana, Dept. Of Water Resources, Tahsil And Distt.- Raipur
         (C.G.)

         5 - Executive Engineer Water Management Division, Rudri, Dhamtari (C.G.)

         6 - Executive Engineer Mahanadi Water Reserve Project Division Code No. 2, Rudri, Distt.-
         Dhamtari (C.G.)                                                      ... Respondents
                                              (Cause title is taken from the CIS)
         ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         For Petitioners                                        : Shri N Naha Roy, Advocate
         For Respondents/State                                  : Shri KS Saini, PL

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wps 7554 of 2025

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 25.07.2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are retired

employees of the Water Resource Department, and were working as Work Charged

Contingency paid employees. It is further submitted that in light of judgment passed

by this Court in WPS-3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel, and others Vs State of

Chhattisgarh and others), and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022,

present petitioners are also entitled for leave encashment.

2. Learned State counsel would submit 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 service to avail the benefit of leave encashment.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

4. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this

petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make a detailed

representation before the concerned respondent/ competent authority within a period

of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents

to substantiate their claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioners are

found to be similarly situated persons as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra),

their claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment passed in that

case expeditiously, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of submission

of the said representation.

5. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and

direction.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter