Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Bhupendra Singh Sisodiya And Ors vs Western Railway on 30 April, 2025
Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Original Application No.200/00946/2021
Along with
Original Application No.200/00056/2022
Jabalpur, this Wednesday, the 30th day of April, 2025
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Sanjay R. Bhati, aged about 50 years, S/o Late Shri Ramesh
Chandra, Sr. Technician, Working as Sr. Section Engineer
AC/TL/Indore Coaching Depot, O/o DRM Ratlam R/o 26-D,
Bakhtawar, Ram Nagar, Indore (M.P.)
2. Afzal Ahmed, aged about 41 year, S/o Abdul Karim, s, Sr.
Technician AC, Working as Sr. Section Engineer AC/TL/Indore
Coaching Depot, O/o DRM Ratlam R/o 30/A, Eliyas Colony,
Khajrana, Indore (M.P.)
3. Sanjay Yadav, aged about 54 years, S/o Late Shri Nanku Prasad
Yadav, Sr. Technician, Working as Sr. Section Engineer
AC/TL/Indore Coaching Depot, O/o DRM Ratlam R/o 95A, Sangam
Nagar, Near Shivaji Vatika, Indore (M.P.)
4. Deshraj Pal, aged about 50 years, S/o Late Shri Ram Swaroop Pal,
Technician Gr.I, Working as Sr. Section Engineer AC/TL/Indore
Coaching Depot, O/o DRM Ratlam R/o 102/2, Jagannath Nagar,
Sector-A, Sanber Road, Indore (M.P.)
5. Sandeep Pancholi, aged about 40 years, S/o Late Shri Rajendra
Prasad, Pancholi, Technician GrIII, Working as Sr. Section Engineer
AC/TL/Indore Coaching Depot, O/o DRM, Ratlam R/o 15,
Vishweshardham Arodram Road, Indore (M.P.)
Page 1 of 9
2025.05.01
VISHAL
12:10:25
KUSHWAH+05'30'
Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022
6. Mahesh Bhai Damore, aged about 37 years, S/o Late Shri Magan
Bhai Damore, Technician Gr.1, Working as Sr. Section Engineer
AC/TL/Indore Coaching Depot, O/o DRM Ratlam R/o Vill. Post
Bordi Sarkari, Dahod (Guj.)
7. Jayesh Yadav, aged about 33 years, S/o Late Ram Lakhan Yadav,
Technician Gr.III, Working as Sr. Section Engineer AC/TL/Indore
Coaching Depot, O/ o DRM Ratlam, R/o 86, Ban Ganga, Chhoti
Kumhar Khadi, Water Tank Road, Laxmi Bai Nagar, Station Road,
Indore (M.P.)
8. Santosh Malviya, aged about 36 years, S/o Late Ram Siddh
Malviya, Technician Gr.III, Working as Sr. Section Engineer
AC/TL/Indore Coaching Depot, O/o DRM Ratlam R/o 38-B, Adarsh
Nagar, Dewas (M.P.)
-Applicants in O.A./946/2021
9. Bhupendra Singh Sisodiya S/o Prabhat Singh Sisodiya aged about
46 years, Sr. Technician, Working as Sr. Section Engineer
RAC/TL/Indore, R/o 47, Indrapuri, Near Reliance Tower, Ratlam
(M.P.)-457001, Mob. No. 8720062664
10. Mansoor Khan S/o Shri Abdul Aziz Khan aged about 47 years,
MCF, Working as Sr. Section Engineer/RAC/TL/Indore, R/o 109/1
Juna Risala, Indore (M.P.)-452006
11. Jujar Singh S/ Shri Chain Singh aged about 30 years, Helper,
Working as Sr. Section Engineer/RAC/IL/Indore, R/o H.No. 506,
Nandbag Colony Gali 9/D, Indore (M.P.)-452006, Mob. No.
9827240447
12. Mohan Ram Kishan Bairagi S/o Shri Ram Kishan Bairagi aged
about 54 years, Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section
Page 2 of 9
2025.05.01
VISHAL
12:10:25
KUSHWAH+05'30'
Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022
Engineer/RAC/TL/Indore, R/o H.No. 229 Vidya Pati Nagar,
Nanakheda Ujjain (M.P.)-456001, Mob. No. 9752493953
13. Nandram Paikara S/o Shri Jogeshwar Singh aged about 54 years,
MCF, Working as Sr. Section Engineer/RAC/TL/Indore, R/o CAT
Road, F-90, Tresure Fantacy, Infront of Surya Temple, Indore (M.P.)-
452006, Mob. No. 9752493949
14. Rajesh Rawal S/o Shri Kailash Rawal aged about 41 years,
Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section Engineer/RAC/TL/Indore, R/o
Chintaman Ganesh Javasiya Road Distt. Ujjain (M.P.)-456006, Mob.
No. 9752493979
15. Kunal Dixit S/o Shri Alok Dixit aged about 29 years, Technician-
1, Working as Sr. Section Engineer/AC/TL/Indore, R/o H.No. F/509,
Abhinandan Apartment, Silicon City Indore (M.P.) -452013, Mob.
No.8982044414
16. Naveen Meena S/o Shri Hurma Ji Meena aged about 33 years,
Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section Engineer SSE/AC/TL/Indore,
R/o H.No. 418 Shri Krishna Paradise Rau, Indore (M.P.) -45331,
Mob. No. 9752493964
17. Rakesh Sourashtriya S/o Shri Chagan Lal Sourashtriya aged about
27 years, Technician-3, Working as Sr. Section
Engineer/AC/TL/Indore, R/o H.No. 11 Ragha Vihar, Dewas (M.P.)-
455001, Mob. No. 9589889913
18. Mohanlal K. S/o Shri Kanhiyalal, aged about 62 years, Sr.
Technician (Retd.), Working as Sr. Section Engineer/AC/TL/Indore,
R/o 4A, 529, Chankay puri, Medki Road Dewas (M.P.)-400551, Mob.
No. 9993219088
Page 3 of 9
2025.05.01
VISHAL
12:10:25
KUSHWAH+05'30'
Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022
19. Pawan Kumar S/o Amar Singh aged about 44 years Technician-3,
Working as Sr. Section Engineer RAC/TL/Indore, R/o A-25 Swastik
Vihar Colony Rau Indore - 453331, Mob. No. 9752493956
20. Hemant Kumar Pathya S/o Hari Ram Pathya aged about 37 years,
Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section Engineer, RAC/TL/Indore, R/o
K-4 Swastik Vihar Colony Rau Indore- 453331, Mob. No.
9752493955
21. Dinesh Chandra Malviya S/o Shri Mangilal Malviya aged about
36 years, Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section
Engineer/AC/TL/Indore, R/o Varma Colony, Maxi Road, Ujjain
(M.P.)- 456010, Mob. No. 9755097780
22. Roshan Kumar Chauhan S/o Shri Kalpnath Singh aged about 46
years, Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section
Engineer/RAC/TL/Indore, R/o H.No. K-3, Swastik Vihar Rau, Indore
(M.P.)- 45331, Mob. No. 9752493956
23. Tarun Sharma S/o Shri Bhuhdev Prasad Sharma aged about 30
years, Technician-2, Working as Sr. Section
Engineer/RAC/TL/Indore, R/o H.No. 172, Ambika Nagar, Ratlam
(M.P.) -457001, Mob. No. 7389918190
24. Kamlesh Rashinkar S/o Dinesh Chandra R. aged about 39 years,
Technician-1, Working as Sr. Section Engineer RAC/TL/Indore, R/o
45 Sundar Nagar Extension Indore- 453331, Mob. No. 7389927640
-Applicants in O.A./56/2022
(By Advocate - Shri M N Banerjee)
Versus
Page 4 of 9
2025.05.01
VISHAL
12:10:25
KUSHWAH+05'30'
Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022
1. Union of India through its General Manager, Western Railways,
Head Quarters Church Gate Mumbai (Maharashtra) Pincode No.-
400020
2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Western Railways Do-Batti
Ratlam, District Ratlam M.P. Pin code No. 457001
3. Sr. Divisional Electrical Engineer, O/o The Divisional Railway
Manager, Western Railways Do-Batti Ratlam, District Ratlam M.P.
Pin code No. 457001
- Common Respondents
(By Advocate - Shri Arun Kumar Soni)
(Date of reserving order: 11.04.2025)
Common Order
By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM The facts, circumstances and the issue involved in these original applications are similar, so both these Original Applications are decided by way of a common order.
2. The applicants are Technicians under different categories and they are aggrieved that they have not been paid overtime allowances for the halt period while escorting AC coaches.
3. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.
4. The counsel for applicants submits that the issue involved in these Original Applications has recently been decided by this Page 5 of 9 2025.05.01 VISHAL 12:10:25 KUSHWAH+05'30' Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022 Tribunal in O.A. 1049/2016. Since the applicants are similarly situated, they are also entitled for the same relief.
5. On careful perusal of the facts of the present case to that of O.A./1049/2016, I have no hesitation to hold that present case is squarely covered with the aforesaid case wherein it was observed as under:
"14. The learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the judgment passed by co-ordinate Bombay Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No.117/2008 decided on 07.03.2011 (Annexure A/1). From this order it is very clear that the O.A. No.117/2008 was filed for claiming proper overtime wages to ACCM and ACCA for the halt period as they are not relieved from their duties even when the train is halted. In the present case also the applicant is also claiming the similar relief regarding the duties of ACCM and ACCA. There is no dispute regarding the fact that the duties of present applicants are same and similar to the duties done by the applicants in O.A. No.117/2008. The applicants in the said O.A. were held entitled for relief as prayed. As the co-ordinate Bombay Bench of this Tribunal has dealt with this issue in detail, case of the applicants is totally covered by the order in O.A. No.117/2008 (Annexure A/1). Para 12 and 13 of the judgment of co-ordinate Bombay Bench in O.A. No. 117/2008 reads as under:
"12. As far as para 1609 of IREC is concerned, it deals with Daily Allowance to be paid to those Railway Servants who remain absent for Headquarters for a certain period during the day. The said Daily Allowance is altogether a different concept and has nothing to do with the overtime allowance to be paid to Page 6 of 9 2025.05.01 VISHAL 12:10:25 KUSHWAH+05'30' Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022 the applicant for the halt period. The Daily Allowance is paid to the railway servant for covering their daily expenses when they travel beyond 8 kms. from Headquarters. Therefore, the defence of the respondents is rejected. The Daily Allowance and the overtime allowance operate in different situation altogether and they are two different concepts.
13. Turning to the facts of the present case, it is noted from the pleadings and records that the applicants are not only never relived after they take charge of the train at Mumbai Central till they return back after return journey, but they are also required to guard the AC Coach and help the secondary maintenance staff for setting right any defect which could have developed during the outward journey in order to avoid complications in return journey back to Mumbai Central. The contents of the letter dated 28.02.2002 are extremely relevant, although written by Sr. Section Engineer under whom the major operations take place. The respondents have not brought out any material to prove that there is any handling over or taking over the applicants at the destination where the train halts for a considerable period before returning to Mumbai. In fact, the applicants, i.e., ACCMs and ACCAs, are not allowed to leave the train unguarded and go anywhere. It amply proves that they are on duty throughout till they return to Mumbai Central and hand over the charge."
15. As per the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents, RBE No.157/1985 (Annexure R/1) the procedure for HOER computation of duty hours of Air- conditioned Coach Attendants and in-charge is as under:-
"The ACC attendants and the in charges may be allowed one hour before the commencement of the train journey for completing the pre- departure formalities. Similarly, they may be allowed one hour more Page 7 of 9 2025.05.01 VISHAL 12:10:25 KUSHWAH+05'30' Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022 after the arrival of the train at their base station for completing the handing over procedures."
Therefore, on the basis of these guidelines the applicants are not entitled for payment of overtime allowance for the halt period. The overtime has been given to the applicant as per Annexure R/2. It has been further submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the definition of overtime allowance is mentioned in Rule 1502 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code-Vol. I (1989 Edition).
16. Regarding the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents, the co-ordinate Bombay Bench of this Tribunal has already dealt with these two objections put forth by the respondent-department and it has been specifically held in Para 11 of the said order that the mere contention of the respondents that the applicants are governed by the Railway Board's letter dated 27.06.1985 or that they are being paid Daily Allowance under Para 1609 of IREC Volume-II, will not frustrate the claim of the present applicants. The co-ordinate Bombay Bench in O.A. No.117/2008 has also taken into consideration the Para 1502 of IREC regarding the definition of 'overtime allowance'. As per Para 10 of the finding of the Co-ordinate Bombay Bench in O.A. No.117/2008, it has been clearly held that the overtime wage is paid to a Railway servant for actual time worked in excess of the hours of employment prescribed by law and the applicants are entitled to get overtime wages for the period which is over and above the prescribed period by law or rule for their duty. It has been further held by the Co-ordinate Bombay Bench that the period spent at halt has to be counted for the purposes of overtime.
17. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the Page 8 of 9 2025.05.01 VISHAL 12:10:25 KUSHWAH+05'30' Subject : Overtime O.A.No. 200/00946/2021 & O.A.No. 200/00056/2022 instant O.A. filed by the applicants are fully covered by the order passed by Co-ordinate Bombay Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No.117/20085 and are entitled for the same relief.
18. Resultantly, this O.A. is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.05.2016 (Annexure A-7) is set aside. The applicants shall present the relevant details of their travelling, including the halt period in question before the respondents within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondents shall calculate the overtime wages according to rules and pay the arrears to the applicants within a period of two months thereafter. The applicants are held entitled for actual arrears upto three years prior to the filing of the present O.A."
6. Accordingly, both these original applications are allowed in terms of the order passed in O.A. No. 1049/2016. No order as to costs.
(Akhil Kumar Srivastava) Judicial Member VK/-
Page 9 of 92025.05.01 VISHAL 12:10:25 KUSHWAH+05'30'