Smt. Shanti Bai vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3009 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Smt. Shanti Bai vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 June, 2025

                                                     1




                                                               2025:CGHC:23688

                                                                                    NAFR

                           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                        WPS No. 4192 of 2025

          1 - Smt. Shanti Bai W/o Late Manu Ram Aged About 64 Years (Legal Heirs Of
          Late Manu Ram Retired Akushal Gangman Shramik, Executive Engineer Public
          Works Department (B/r) Division Jashpur, District Jahspur Chhattisgarh, R/o
          Village Jamchuwan, Tahsil Kunkuri District Jashpur Chhattisgarh
                                                                        ... Petitioner(s)

                                                  versus

          1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works,
          Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

          2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works, Nirman Bhawan, North Block, Naya Raipur
          Chhattisgarh

          3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department Ambikapur, District Surguja
          Chhattisgarh

          4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department (B/r) Division Jashpur, District
          Jashpur Chhattisgarh

          5 - Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension, Ambikapur, District Surguja
          Chhattisgarh

                                                                             ... Respondent(s)

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Jeet Ram Patel, Advocate

For Respondents/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate and Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date:

2025.06.13 19:12:31 +0530

Order on Board

12/06/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is retired

employee of the respondents' Departments and was working as Work

Charged Contingency paid employee. It is further submitted that in light of

judgment passed by this Court in WPS No. 3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram

Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other

connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, present petitioner is also

entitled for leave encashment.

2. Learned State counsel would submit that sufficient documents have not

been filed by the petitioner, and it is also not reflected as to whether the

petitioner has 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 petitioner to make a detailed

representation before the concerned respondents/competent authority

within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order

with all necessary documents to substantiate her claim. In that event, on

due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person,

as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), her 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, the present petition stands disposed of with aforesaid

observation and direction.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved