Vijay Kumar Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3203 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Vijay Kumar Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 June, 2025

                                                                                                   Digitally signed by
                                                                                                   V PADMAVATHI
                                                                                                   Date: 2025.06.24
                                                                                                   17:20:07 +0530




                                                                              2025:CGHC:27107


                                                                                                   NAFR

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                         WPS No. 5706 of 2025

1 - Vijay Kumar Tiwari S/o Ganesh Prasad Tiwari Aged About 62 Years R/o Ward No.
8 Swami Vivekanand, Simga, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

2 - Smt. Kumari Bai Verma W/o Ramkhilawan Verma Aged About 67 Years R/o I-9
Irrigation Colony, Shanti Nagar, Ward No. 33, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Smt. Dulari Bai Dhiwar W/o Bhukha Dhiwar Aged About 64 Years R/o Bhaisa,
P.S.- Kharora, Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                                 ... Petitioner(s)

                                                    versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department,
Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

2 - The Engineer-In-Chief Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan, Nawa
Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

3 - The Chief Engineer Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Godawri Kachhar,
Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

4 - The Chief Engineer Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Project, Raipur,
District- Raipur (C.G.)

5 - The Chief Executive Engineer Water Management Division No. 1, Raipur, (C.G.)

6 - The Chief Executive Engineer Water Resource Construction Division, Kasdol,
District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

7 - The Chief Executive Engineer Water Management Division No. 2 Balodabazar-
Bhatapara, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

8 - The Divisional Joint Director Treasury, Accounts And Pension, Raipur, District-
Raipur (C.G.)
                                                                    ... Respondents
                              (Cause title is taken from the CIS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioners                                        : Shri KP Sahu, Advocate
For Respondents/State                                  : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, GA

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

Wps 5706 of 2025

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 23.06.2025

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