Disposed

Om Narayan Varma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Sept 2024WPS/5719/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, retired work charged employees, sought directions for leave encashment. The court referred to a prior judgment on identical issues and allowed petitioners to submit representations, directing authorities to decide within three months if claims are valid.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to make detailed representation; respondents directed to decide claims within three months.

Om Narayan Varma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 3

2024:CGHC:36123

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 5719 of 2024

¶6

1 - Om Narayan Varma S/o Late Shri Chintaram Varma Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Kodba Post Satha Tehsil Palari District - Balodabazar - Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

2 - Mohammad Ali S/o Late Shri Peer Ali, Aged About 63 Years R/o Indra Colony Palari Tehsil Palari District - Balodabazar - Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

... Petitioners

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Public Health Engineering Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

2 - Engineer-In-Chief, Public Health Engineering Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District -Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

3 - Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Neer Bhavan Civil Line Zone Raipur, District -Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

4 - Suprintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Neer Khalsa School Pandri Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

5 - Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Division Balodabazar, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

6 - Director, Treasury, Account And Pension, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

2 / 3

¶18

For Petitioners : Mr. Amod Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Akansha Verma Dabhadker, Panel Lawyer

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board

¶20

17.09.2024

¶21

1. Heard.

¶22

1. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners stood retired as Work Charged/Contingency Paid Employees. He would further submits that the petitioners are entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment to petitioners. 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 & Ors. ). In the light of Faguvaram (supra) the petitioners have raised identical issue which may be allowed in their favour. He submits that, at this stage, petitioners 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 petitioners expeditiously within specific period as fixed by this Court.

¶23

1. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioners are not pressing this petition on merits and are only seeking a direction to decide the representations to be submitted by petitioners, at this stage, he is having no objection.

¶24

1. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record.

¶25

1. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioners, without commenting anything on the merits, this petition is disposed of in light of Faguvaram Patel (Supra) giving liberty to the petitioners to make detailed representation before the concerned respondent/competent authority within the period of ‘15 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In the event, the petitioners are found to be similarly situated persons, their claim shall be decided by

¶26

3 / 3

¶27

the respondents in accordance with the relevant rules and law expeditiously preferably within the period of ‘ three months ’ from the date of submission of the said representation.

¶28

1. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. All the pending applications are also disposed of.

¶29

C.C. as per rules

¶30

Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶31

Abhigya.S

Om Narayan Varma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Narayan Varma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddharth Rahul Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kamleshwar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemant Kumar Gabel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kamlesh Kumar Sen Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chhotu Ram Gond Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Limited

Fuljesiya Kerketta Vs State of Chhattisgarh