Dinanath Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3110 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Dinanath Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 June, 2025

                                                                                          Digitally signed by
                                                                                          V PADMAVATHI
                                                                                          Date: 2025.06.19
                                                                                          18:39:53 +0530




                                                                              2025:CGHC:25514

                                                                                                    NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                         WPS No. 5016 of 2025

1 - Dinanath Sahu S/o Savant Ram Aged About 63 Years Retire Chowkidar R/o
Village-   Sankra,    Tehsil   -   Nagri,   District- Dhamtari     (C.G.)

2 - Ramu Lal Sahu S/o Niram Singh Sahu Aged About 63 Years Retired Chowkidar,
R/o Village - Hinchapur, Tehsil - Nagri, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)

3 - Smt. Bhagbati W/o Narendra Kumar Aged About 63 Years Retired Labour, R/o
Village-   Sankra,     Tehsil   -    Nagri,  District-   Dhamtari     (C.G.)

4 - Nandu Ram Sahu S/o Bodhiram Sahu Aged About 63 Years Retired Gangman,
R/o Village- Anjani Para, Ranigaon, Tehsil - Nagri, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
                                                                        ... Petitioner(s)

                                                    versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through, The Secretary, Water Resource Department
Mahanadi        Bhawan          Atal       Nagar         Raipur      (C.G.)

2 - Engineer In Chief Water Resource Department Raipur District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.

3 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godawari Kachhar, Water Resource Department Raipur,
District-                            Raipur                              (C.G.)

4 - Executive Engineer Mahanadi Jalasay Pariyojna, Dam Division No. 2 Rudri,
District-Dhamtari                                                     (C.G.)

5 - Sub Divisional Officer Mahanadi Jalasay Pariyojna Sub Division No. 5, Tehsil
Nagri, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
                                                                 ... Respondents
                             (Cause title is taken from the CIS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioners : Shri Swapnil Keshari, and Shri Akash Singh, Advocates For Respondents/State : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, GA and Shri Khulesh Sahu, PL

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

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 18.06.2025 Wps 5016 of 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