Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Kewal Singh S/O Pritam Singh vs Union Of India Through Secretary ... on 13 January, 2017
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
OA No. 060/00045/2017 Date of decision-13.01.2017
CORAM: HONBLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J)
1. Kewal Singh S/o Pritam Singh, Senior Point Man (PM), Sada Singh Wala (age 55 years).
2. Balwant Singh S/o Sita Singh, Senior Point Man (PM), Sada Singh Wala.
3. Nazar Singh S/o Pritam Singh, Senior Point Man (PM), Sada Singh Wala.
4. Gurjant Singh S/o Gurdev Singh, Senior Point Man (PM), Sada Singh Wala.
5. Karamjeet Singh S/o Naranjan Singh, Senior Point Man (PM), Sada Singh Wala.
All applicants are posted as Senior Pointsman at Railway Station, Sada Singh Wala in District Mansa on Bathinda-Delhi, Railway Line.
APPLICANTS
BY ADVOCATE : Sh. J.P.S. Sidhu.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Secretary Ministry of Railways, Government of India, New Delhi.
2. General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi.
3. Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, State Entry Road-New Delhi.
4. Sr. Divisional Personal Officer, Northern Railway, Office of the Divisional Railway Manager, State Entry Road, New Delhi.
RESPONDENTS
ORDER (ORAL)
HONBLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J):-
By means of present O.A filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants seek following relief:-
(ii) A direction be issued to respondents to classify applicants under the category of continuous workers and to put them on daily 8 hours roster duty and to pay them over time allowance for additional hours of work done over and above 8 hours roster duty.
(iii) Direction be issued to respondents to pay over time allowance to applicants for extra four hours duty performed by them in 12 hours roster shifts during the last three years as admissible under the rules for the continuous workers alongwith interest @ 24% per annum for period of delay.
2. On the commencement of hearing, learned counsel for the applicants fairly submitted that before approaching this court, the applicants have already made a representation on 22.08.2016 for the similar relief as claimed in the present O.A which was processed by them as replied to by the respondents vide letter dated 24.08.2016 but till date no order has been passed by them and they have been forced to work for 12 hours a day. He, therefore, made a statement at the bar that the applicants would be satisfied if this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide pending representation of the applicants by passing a reasoned and speaking order in a time bound manner.
3. Issue notice to the respondents.
4. Sh. Lakhinder Bir Singh, Nodal Officer of Railway, appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He did not object to the disposal of the O.A in the requested manner. However, he prayed that six weeks time may be granted to decide the claim of the applicants.
5. Considering the ad-idem between the parties, the present O.A is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents to decide the pending representation of the applicants by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. Orders so passed be duly communicated to the applicants.
6. The disposal of the O.A may not be construed as a expression of any opinion on the merit of the case.
7. No costs.
(SANJEEV KAUSHIK) MEMBER (J) Dated: 13.01.2017.
`jk 1 OA No. 060/00045/2017