Dilip Kumar Nirj vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3113 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Dilip Kumar Nirj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 June, 2025

                                                                                          Digitally signed by
                                                                                          V PADMAVATHI
                                                                                          Date: 2025.06.19
                                                                                          18:39:52 +0530




                                                                              2025:CGHC:25513

                                                                                                    NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                         WPS No. 5015 of 2025

1 - Dilip Kumar Nirj S/o Shri Tipan Ram Nirj Aged About 44 Years Working As Phone
Operator (On Collector Rate As Daily Wages Employee), At Office Of Sub Divisional
Officer, Public Works Department (B/r), Sub-Division Jashpur No.-1, District - Jashpur
(C.G.)

2 - Suman Kumar S/o Shri Eliyas Khess Aged About 56 Years Working As Mali (On
Collector Rate As Daily Wages Employee), At Office Of Sub Divisional Officer, Public
Works Department (B/r), Sub-Division Jashpur No.-1, District - Jashpur (C.G.)
                                                                     ... Petitioner(s)

                                                    versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department Of Public Works,
Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works, Nirman Bhawan, North Block,
Naya Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department (B/r), Ambikapur Zone, District - Surguja
(C.G.)

4 - Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department (B/r), Bilaspur Circle, District -
Bilaspur (C.G.)

5 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department (B/r), Sub-Division Jashpur, District -
Jashpur (C.G.)

6 - Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department (B/r), Sub-Division Jashpur No.1,
District - Jashpur (C.G.)
                                                                     ... Respondents
                             (Cause title is taken from the CIS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioners                                        : Shri Prabhu Lal, Advocate
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 5015 of 2025

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

employees of the Public Works 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 (Faguram 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