Vijay Kumar Jadit v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC26 Jun 2025WPS/6525/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Leave encashment; work charged contingency paid employee; retired Sthayi Sahayak; P.W.D. Raipur; Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others, WPS No. 3870 of 2021, decided 30.09.2022; similarly situated employee; detailed representation to competent authority; due verification; minimum service; disposed of with directions; High Court of Chhattisgarh; Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.; WPS No. 6525 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation with all necessary documents within 30 days; on due verification, if found similarly situated as in Faguvaram Patel (supra), the respondents to decide his leave encashment claim in light of that judgment, expeditiously preferably within 90 days of submission of the representation. ¶¶25

Vijay Kumar Jadit Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, a retired Work Charged Contingency paid employee, is entitled to leave encashment in light of the judgment in WPS No. 3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel). +1 more

¶¶22

Court's answer

Without commenting on the merits, the petition is disposed of, granting the petitioner liberty to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondents/competent authority within 30 days with all necessary documents to substantiate his claim.

¶¶25

Ratio / Principle

On due verification, if the petitioner is found to be a similarly situated person as in Faguvaram Patel (supra), his claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of the judgment passed in that case, expeditiously preferably within 90 days from submission of the representation.

¶¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur — WPS No. 6525 of 2025 — Vijay Kumar Jadit v. State of Chhattisgarh and others — decided 27/06/2025 by Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. The petitioner, a 72-year-old retired 'Sthayi Sahayak' who worked as a Work Charged Contingency paid employee under the P.W.D., claimed leave encashment relying on this Court's judgment in WPS No. 3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others, decided 30.09.2022). The State submitted that sufficient documents had not been filed and that completion of minimum service for the benefit was not reflected. Without commenting on merits, the Court disposed of the petition granting liberty to file a detailed representation with all necessary documents within 30 days; on due verification, if found similarly situated to Faguvaram Patel (supra), the respondents were directed to decide the claim in light of that judgment, expeditiously preferably within 90 days of submission of the representation.

2025:CGHC:28517

NAFR

Digitally signed by ALOK ALOKSHARMA SHARMADate:2025.06.27 19:48:26 +0530

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPS No. 6525 of 2025

¶7

1 - Vijay Kumar Jadit S/o Late Shri Ramdhan Jadit Aged About 72 Years Retired Sthayi Sahayak, R/o Jai Hind Chowk, Raja Talab, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492001, Mobile- 9425527959

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. -492101

¶11

2 - Executive Engineer P.W.D. Sub-Division No. 4 (Aarambh), Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. -492101

¶12

3 - Chief Engineer P.W.D. Circle No. 2, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. - 492101

¶13

4 - Senior Accounts Officer District Treasury Office, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. -492101

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Govt. Advocate.

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

27/06/2025

¶19

1 . Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is retired

¶20

employee of the respondents’ Departments and was working as Work

¶21

¶22

Charged Contingency paid employee. It is further submitted that in light of judgment passed by this Court in WPS No. 3870 of 2021 ( Faguvaram Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others ) and other connected matters, decided on 30.09.2022, present petitioner is also entitled for leave encashment.

¶23

2 . Learned State counsel would submit 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 service to avail the benefit of leave encashment.

¶24

3 . Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

¶25

4 . Be that as it may, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the concerned respondents/competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate his claim. In that event, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated person, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), his 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.

¶26

5 . Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶29

Alok

Vijay Kumar Jadit v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Jadit v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saurabh Kumar Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gevendra Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amit Choudhari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amit Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishnu Narayan Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ankit Bani Vs State of Chhattisgarh