Disposed

Sukvara Bai Sarthi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Sept 2024WPS/5799/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired work charged/contingency paid employees sought directions for leave encashment. The court dismissed the matter on limited prayer, directing petitioners to submit representations for consideration under precedent within 15 days, responsive decision within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit representations within 15 days; respondents to consider and decide within three months.

Sukvara Bai Sarthi Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 3

2024:CGHC:36608

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 5799 of 2024

¶6

1 - Sukvara Bai Sarthi W/o Shri Samaru Sarthi Aged About 63 Years R/o Near Tulja Kirana Store, Kastubra Nagar Ward 4, District Bilaspur, (C.G.)

¶7

2 - Kanhaiya Lal Mansar S/o Shri Mohit Ram Mansar Aged About 69 Years R/o Village Tendwa Matsagra District - Bilaspur (C.G)

¶8

... Petitioners

¶9

versus

¶10

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

¶11

2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Indrawati Bhawan New Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

3 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Division No.1 Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶13

4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department Division No.2 Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶14

5 - Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.)

¶15

... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Mayank Kumar, Advocate

¶16

2 / 3

¶17

For Respondent

¶18

: Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board

¶20

19.09.2024

¶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 the respondents in accordance with the relevant rules and law expeditiously

¶26

3 / 3

¶27

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.

¶29

All the pending applications are also disposed of.

¶30

C.C. as per rules

¶31

Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶32

Abhigya.S

Sukvara Bai Sarthi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukvara Bai Sarthi 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

Tikam Ram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Tikeshwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Badakdau Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ravindra Singh Tomar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lalit Narayan Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mrs. Khomin Rawte Vs the State of Chhattisgarh