Deobansh Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deobansh Dubey S/o Late Indrajeet Debey Aged About 64 Years R/o Behind Kisan Rice Mill, Krishna Nagar, Namana Kala, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja ( Chhattisgarh).

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

versus

¶12

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.).

¶13

2 - Commissioner, Directorate, Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa, Raipur, (C.G.).

¶14

3 - District Education Officer, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

4 – Principal, Holy Cross Convent Higher Secondary School, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

... Respondent(s)

¶17

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶18

For Petitioner	: Ms. Apoorva Ghore,Advocate
For Respondents/ State	: Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Govt. Advocate
For Respondent No.4	: Mr. Ashish Beck, Advocate

¶19

2

¶20

Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶21

Order on Board

¶22

16/07/2026

¶23

By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to consider his case for grant of remaining amount of leave encashment along with interest and further seeks a direction to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P/1).

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was retired from the post of Upper Division Teacher on 28.02.2023 from Holy Cross Convent Higher Secondary School, Ambikapur, a Government-aided institution, but has not been paid the full amount of leave encashment. She submits that despite repeated representations, the grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed. It is further submitted that the petitioner is entitled to the remaining amount of leave encashment and, therefore, the respondent authorities be directed to consider and decide his claim in accordance with law.

¶25

On the last date of hearing, i.e., 30.06.2026, this Court directed the Director, Directorate of Public Instructions (DPI), to file an affidavit specifying the date from which the petitioner is entitled to leave encashment.

¶26

In compliance with the said direction, the Director (DPI) has filed an affidavit dated 06.07.2026 stating, in paragraph 5 thereof, that the petitioner is entitled to leave encashment from the institution

¶27

3

¶28

where he was serving and from which he superannuated, i.e., respondent No.4, with effect from 01.07.1986.

¶29

Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 do not dispute the aforesaid stand taken in the affidavit filed by the Director (DPI) and submit that the present writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to take necessary steps for release of the remaining amount of leave encashment payable to the petitioner.

¶30

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

¶31

Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the affidavit filed by the DPI and further considering the fact that the respondent No.4 has not controverted the averments of the affidavit of the DPI, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to take necessary steps for release of the remaining amount of leave encashment payable to the petitioner, strictly in accordance with the affidavit filed by the Director (DPI) dated 06.07.2026, preferably within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of .

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE

¶35

$. Bhilwar

Deobansh Dubey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deobansh Dubey 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Kumar Umre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Chanda Bahesh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dinesh Kumar Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Sharma Vs Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Director General

Dhaniyaram Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Priyanka Gaikwad Vs State of Chhattisgarh