Chhattisgarh High Court
WPS/7389/2026 of RAJMAN Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 8 October 2026
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7389 of 2026 1 - Rajman W/o Late Shri Ram Charan, Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 42, Ward No. 09, Jagatpur, Surajpur, District - Surajpur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Water Resources
CGHC010399312026
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 7389 of 2026
1 - Rajman W/o Late Shri Ram Charan, Aged About 53 Years R/o House No.
42, Ward No. 09, Jagatpur, Surajpur, District - Surajpur C.G.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur C.G.
2 - Engineer - In -Chief Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, C.G.
3 - Executive Engineer W. R. D. Division - Baikunthpur, District - Koriya C.G.
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner
:
Shri Sanjay Yadav, Advocate.
For State
:
Ms. Apurv Nigam, Panel Lawyer.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Order on Board
09.10.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the Husband of petitioner stood retired as Work Charged/Contingency Paid Employee. He would further submit that the husband of petitioner was entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment. He stated that an identical issue has already been come up for hearing before this Court bearing Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 30.09.2022. In the light of Faguvaram (supra) the petitioner raised identical issue which may be allowed in her favour. He submits that, at this stage, petitioner may be permitted to submit representation before the respondents/competent authority and respondents/competent authority may be directed to consider and decide the representation of petitioner expeditiously within specific period as fixed by this Court.
2. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking direction to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner, at this stage, she is having no objection.
3. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record.
4. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed of in light of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) reserving liberty to the petitioner to make detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority. In the event, petitioner submits representation, her claim shall be considered and decided in accordance with the relevant rules and law and after verification of the service records of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within the period of 'three months' from the date of receipt of the such representation, keeping in mind the decision in case of Faguvaram Patel (Supra).
5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.
Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder