Ashok Kumar Luniya Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ashok Kumar Luniya Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation; upon submission, his leave encashment claim is to be considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within three months of receipt of the representation, keeping in mind the decision in Faguvaram Patel (supra); certified copy as per rules.

Issue for consideration

Entitlement of the petitioner — a retired Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employee — to leave encashment, and whether respondents should be directed to consider and decide his claim/representation in that regard.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner (who was not pressing the petition on merits), this Court disposed of the petition permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation.

Ratio / Principle

In the event the petitioner submits the fresh representation, his claim shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation, keeping in mind the decision in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Parth Prateem Sahu, J.), by order dated 11.03.2026, disposed of WPS No. 2339 of 2026 without adjudicating the claim on merits. The petitioner, Ashok Kumar Luniya, a 70-year-old retired Chowkidar who served as a Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employee at the Government Ayurved College Hospital, Bilaspur, asserted entitlement to leave encashment, which the State respondents had not released. Counsel for the petitioner did not press the petition on merits and sought leave to file a fresh representation in light of Faguvaram Patel & Ors. v. State of C.G., W.P.(S) No. 3870 of 2021 (decided 30.09.2022), wherein an identical issue had been allowed in favour of the petitioners therein; the State raised no objection. The Court permitted the petitioner to make a fresh representation and directed that, upon its submission, his claim be considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within three months from receipt of the representation, keeping in mind the decision in Faguvaram Patel (supra). Certified copy as per rules.

1 / 3

2026:CGHC:11615

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 2339 of 2026

1 - Ashok Kumar Luniya S/o Lt. Samliya Luniya Aged About 70 Years Retired Chowkidar, Posted At Office Of Superintendent Government Ayurved College Hospital, Nutan Colony, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Cg). R/o Village Ghutku, Post- Ghutku Tahsil- Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (Cg)

... Petitioner

versus

ALFIZA BAIG

Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.03.12 11:44:27 +0530

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department Of Health Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District- Raipur (Cg)

2 - Director Ayurved, Yog And Prakratik Chikitsa, Yunani, Siddh And Homeopathy (Ayush) Chhattisgarh Raipur, District- Raipur (Cg)

3 - Principal And Superintendent Government Ayurved College Chikitsalay Bilaspur District Bilaspur (Cg)

4 - Joint Director Pension And Account, Treasury Department Bilaspur Division District Bilaspur (Cg)

... Respondents

For Petitioner	: Ms. Mamta Mahilange, Advocate
For State	: Mrs. Poorva Tiwari, Panel lawyer

2 / 3

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Order on Board

11.03.2026

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who stood retired as Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees is entitled for leave encashment but till date respondents have not extended the benefit of leave encashment to petitioner. Identical issue came up for hearing before this Court in case of Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of C.G., in W.P.(S) No. 3870 of 2021 decided on 30.09.2022 , wherein petitioners have raised identical issue which was allowed in their favour. She submits that at this stage, petitioner may be permitted to submit representation in light of Faguvaram Patel (supra) and respondents be directed to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner expeditiously within specified time.

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

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

Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make fresh representation. In the event, petitioner submit representation, his claim shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three

3 / 3

months from the date of receipt of representation keeping in mind decision in case of Faguvaram Patel (supra).

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.

Certified copy as per rules. sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

Alfiza