K.P Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:17404

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 3305 of 2026

¶6

1 - K.P Tiwari S/o Late Shri Ram Gulam Tiwari Aged About 67 Years Baigin Dabhar, Korba District Korba (C.G.)

¶7

2 - S K Kashyap S/o Late Shri Sukha Dayal Aged About 66 Years Pondi Bahar Korba District Korba (C.G.)

¶8

3 - Radheshyam Shrivas S/o Shri Lachhi Ram Shrivas Aged About 66 Years Yamuna Bihar Mangla Chowk District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶9

4 - Smt. Kumari Bai Yadav W/o Late Shri Firanta Ram Yadav Aged About 65 Years Pathrripara, Korba District Korba (C.G.)

¶10

5 - Smt. Ram Bai W/o Late Shri Jeevan Lal Yadav Aged About 50 Years Pathrripara Korba District Korba (C.G.)

¶11

... Petitioner(s)

¶12

versus

¶13

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration Department Mantralaya Atal Nagar New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

2 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation Korba District Korba (C.G.)

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

2

¶17

For Petitioner(s)	: Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent No.1/State	: Shri Lav Sharma, PL
For Respondent No.2	: Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate

¶18

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu)

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

16/04/2026

¶21

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners’ who retried as Work-Charged and Contingency Paid Employees are entitled for leave encashment. However, till date the respondents have not extended the said benefit to them. It is further submitted that an identical issue was considered by this Court in Faguvaram Patel and Others Vs. State of CG, in WP(S) No. 3870 of 2021, decided on 30.09.2022, wherein the matter was decided in favour of the petitioners.

¶22

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be permitted to submit a representation in light of the aforesaid judgment and the respondents be directed to consider and decide the same expeditiously within a stipulated time.

¶23

Learned State counsel submits that since the petitioners are not pressing this petition on merits and are only seeking a direction for consideration of their representation, he has no objection to the same.

¶24

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

¶25

Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to submit fresh representations before the competent authority. In the event, such representation is submitted, the same shall be considered and decided

¶26

3

¶27

in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt thereof, keeping in view the decision rendered in Faguvaram Patel (supra) .

¶28

It is made clear that the aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken subject to verification of the facts of the case.

¶29

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

Digitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date:2026.04.20 15:33:33 +0530

¶32

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

K.P Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.P Tiwari v. 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

R.K. Chalisgaonkar Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization

Kiran Sharma Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization

Ashwani Vs Union of India

Smt. Maheshwari Paikra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Saroj Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Thakur Narendra Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh