Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Muni Ram Meena vs M/O Railways on 12 July, 2017
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench
OA No. 2242/2017
MA No. 2398/2017
New Delhi this the 12th day of July, 2017
Hon'ble Mr. K.N. Shrivastava, Member (A)
1. Muni Ram Meena, Aged 38 years,
S/o Sh. Pyre Lal Meena,
Working as Gangman in N.R.
Delhi Division, under SSE Gohana,
r/o village Gotyka pura, Post Dhahnya,
Tesh. Nodoti, Distt. Karoli (Raj.)
2. Jagmender, Aged 37years,
S/o Sh. Dalip Singh,
Working as Keyman under
Senior Section Engineer, Gohana,
R/o Puthi Tesh. Gohana, Distt. Sonipat (Har)
3. Sunil Kumar, Aged 34 years,
S/o Sh. Dhipan Singh,
Working as Gangman under
Senior Section Engineer, Gohana,
R/o Puthi Tesh. Gohana, Distt. Sonipat (Har)
4. Sunil Kumar, aged 27 years,
S/o Sh. Dharambir,
Working as Gateman under
Senior Section Engineer, Gohana,
r/o vill. & PO Ghilot Kalan,
Distt. Rohtak (Haryana)
5. Jitender Kumar, aged 31 years,
s/o Sh. Raj Kumar,
working as Keyman under
Senior Section Engineer, Gohana,
Distt. Rohtak,
r/o Q.No. E/14B, Gohana Railway Colony,
Distt. Sonepat (Haryana)
6. Anil Kumar, aged 31 years,
s/o Sh. Laxmi Narain,
working as Gateman under
Senior Section Engineer, Gohana,
r/o vill. Robhra, Tesh. Gohana,
2
Distt. Sonipat (Haryana)
7. Satyawn, aged 51 years,
s/o Sh. Uday Singh,
Working as Gateman, under SSE Gohana,
r/o vill. & PO Bhaswan Khurad,
Distt. Sonepat (Haryana)
8. Satish Kumar, aged 36 years,
s/o Sh. Raj Singh,
Working as LR Gateman, under SSE Gohana,
r/o Vill. & PO Rukhi, Distt. Sonipat (Har) - Applicants
(By Advocate: Ms. Sonika for Mr. Yogesh Sharma)
-Versus-
1. Union of India through
The General Manager,
Northern Railway,
Baroda House, New Delhi
2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway,
State Entry Road, New Delhi
3. The Assistant Divisional Engineer,
Northern Railway, Delhi Division,
Railway Station, Rohtak (Haryana) - Respondents
ORDER (Oral)
MA for joining together is allowed for the reasons mentioned therein.
2. The applicants are presently working under Senior Section Engineer (P.Way), Gohana, to the post of Gateman, Gangman and Keyman. Their grievance is that they have not been paid overtime allowance by the respondents. In this regard, they have served a legal notice dated 01.05.2017 (pg. 19) on the respondents, which has not been disposed of, so far.
3
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would be satisfied if a time-bound direction is issued to respondent no.2 to dispose of the pending legal notice of the applicants.
4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and without going into the merits of the case, the OA is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to decide the legal notice of the applicants dated 01.05.2017 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(K.N. Shrivastava) Member (A) /lg/