Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Sushila Kerketta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 March, 2025
1
Digitally
2025:CGHC:10521
signed by
RAVI
RAVI SHANKAR
SHANKAR MANDAVI
MANDAVI Date:
2025.03.10
18:48:31
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1565 of 2025
1 - Smt. Sushila Kerketta W/o Shri Rajendra Kerketta Aged About 65
Years Retired Sweeper At Executive Engineer, Public Works
Department Division, Pathalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh R/o
Village Kurumkela, Tahsil - Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public
Works Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh
2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works, Nirman Bhawan,
North Block, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department Bilaspur Zone, District
Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department Division Pathalgaon,
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 State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
04/03/2025
1. Heard Mr. Jeet Ram Patel, learned counsel petitioner as well as
Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, learned Panel Lawyer for
State/respondents.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:
"10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to
the case of the petitioner.
10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to direct the respondents authorities to
give benefit of leave encashment within
stipulated time to the petitioner with interest, in
the interest of the justice.
10.3 That, any other relief which the Hon'ble
Court may deemed fit and proper also be
granted to the petitioner, in the interest of
justice."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was
initially appointed as work-charge employee in respondent
department in the year 1992 and due to superannuation she was
retired from her service in the year 2021, she has been given
other retiral dues but not given amount of leave encashment. After
appointment of the petitioner, she has performed her duty with
utmost honesty, sincerity and to the satisfaction of her superiors.
She was never communicated any adverse remarks in her entire
service period and till superannuation period her length of service
period had long years. On being completing the length of service,
the petitioner was superannuated in the year 2021. The petitioner
is also entitled for the Leave Encashment, but till date benefit of
leave encashment has not been extended to the petitioner. He
submits that in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Writ
Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs.
State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) and other connected matters
decided on 30.09.2022, the petitioner is entitled for leave
encashment.
4. Learned State counsel submits 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 period of
service to avail the benefit of leave encashment.
5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the
documents available in record.
6. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this
petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make
detailed representation before the concerned
respondent/competent authority within the period of '30 days'
from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary
documents to substantiate her claim. In the event of filing of
representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be
similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel
(surpa), her claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of
judgment of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) expeditiously preferably
within the period of '90 days' from the date of submission of the
said representation.
7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid
observations and directions.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Ravi Mandavi
