Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Najeer Ahmad vs M/O Railways on 9 January, 2026
1
(Reserved on 18.12.2025)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
This the 09th day of January, 2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Original Application No. 940 of 2015
Najeer Ahmad (Helper AC Wing), S/o Shri Abdul Hafiz, Date of birth
01.04.1961, R/o LIG 857, near Naveen School, Aditya Nagar, Durg -
491001. -Applicant
Advocate for the applicant: Shri Arun Patel
Versus
1. Union of India through its General Manager, South-East Central
Railways, Bilaspur (CG)-491004.
2. The Chief Personnel Officer, Headquarter, South East Central
Railways, Bilaspur CG, 495004.
3. Divisional Railway Manager, South East Central Railway, Raipur
Division, Raipur, CG - 492008.
4. Senior DPO, South East Central Railway, Raipur Division, Raipur,
CG - 492008. -Respondents
Advocate for the respondents: Shri D.S. Baghel
ORDER
By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM.
The present original application has been directed against the order dated 05.09.2012 (Annexure A-4) and for a direction to the respondents to grant overtime allowance to the applicant by adding the ANAND 2026.01.13 PRAKASH 15:57:23 Page 1 of 6 DUBEY +05'30' 2 component of DA on transport allowance for the date when it was due to him with all consequential benefits.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that after implementation of Sixth Pay Commission, the employees working in AC Wing and governed in Hour of Employment Rules (HOER) are entitled for DA on transport allowance for the purpose of computing OTA. Further, as per the Railway Board Circular No. 170/2008 and 31/2010 (Annexure A-1), the revised rate of overtime allowance shall be effective from 01.09.2010 and the cadre who are governed by HOER are entitled to get DA on transport allowance for payment of overtime allowance. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that since the aforesaid benefit was not given to the employees governed by HOER in Raipur Division, the issue was raised before the competent authority but the respondents are not following the statutory provisions and vide order dated 05.09.2012 (Annexure A-4) they have declined to add the DA component on transport allowance while computing OTA without assigning any reason. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the action of the respondents is arbitrary and discriminatory as the similar benefit is being granted to the employees of AC Wing working in Mumbai Division by adding DA upon transport allowance. Being aggrieved, the applicant preferred a representation dated 11.07.2015 but ANAND 2026.01.13 PRAKASH 15:57:23 Page 2 of 6 DUBEY +05'30' 3 having received no response, the present original application has been filed.
3. Per contra, the respondents have filed reply stating therein that as per the RBE No. 61/98 (Annexure R-1), the Railway employees governed by HOER are entitled for the emoluments for the purpose of computation of rates of OTA comprise with revised rates of pay, DA, and CCA only. The respondents have further stated that as per RBE No. 168/2000 dated 01.09.2000 (Annexure R-3), the transport allowance shall also be included in the basic rate of wage for the purpose of computation of overtime allowance. Accordingly, the transport allowance has been treated as part of emoluments like HRA as well as CCA for the purpose of overtime allowance and the DA is added over the entire emoluments which include transport allowance also. Thus, the respondents have stated that the overtime allowance is paid to the employees after counting transport allowance also in the basic emoluments. Referring to RBE No. 31/2010 (Annexure A-1), the respondents have stated that there is no provision to give separate DA while counting overtime allowance. If while counting overtime allowance, the DA is again counted upon transport allowance, it will amount to pay double DA. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to get separate DA on transport allowance for the purpose of counting overtime allowance. The respondents have stated that the Mumbai Division has wrongly interpreted the instructions ANAND 2026.01.13 PRAKASH 15:57:23 Page 3 of 6 DUBEY +05'30' 4 issued by the Railway Board as the DA will not be counted twice while counting OTA.
4. In rejoinder, the learned counsel for the applicant reiterated the facts of OA.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the pleadings and documents annexed therewith.
6. From the facts enumerated above, the issue to be decided before us as to whether the applicant being employee governed under HOER is entitled for the DA to be added on transport allowance for the purpose of computing OTA or not?
7. It is not disputed that the applicant is covered under HOER. In regard to his claim, the applicant has cited the RBE No. 170/2008 and 31/2010 (Annexure A-1). It is noted that as per RBE No. 170/2008, the rates of Transport Allowances has been fixed. So far as the RBE No. 31/2010 is concerned, it relates to Grant of overtime allowance to the Railway employees. Para 2 of this RBE, which relates to components for the purpose of computation of rates of OTA, reproduced below: -
ANAND 2026.01.13 PRAKASH 15:57:23 Page 4 of 6 DUBEY +05'30' 5 "2. The emoluments, for the purpose of computation of rates of OTA will comprise the followingv: -
a). Railway employees governed by Factories Act *Basic Pay (Pay in Pay Band +Grade Pay) *Dearness Allowance *House Rent Allowance *Transport Allowance *Cash equivalent of the advantage accruing through the concessional sale to workers of food grains and other articles, as the worker is for the time being entitled to (excluding wages for Overtime work or Bonus)
b). Railway employees governed by HOER * All the items as shown in (a) except House Rent Allowance."
8. The above quoted paragraph of the RBE No. 31/2010 does not say anywhere that the separate DA upon the transport allowance for counting overtime allowance will be computed. As per the recommendation of Sixth Pay Commission, the employees have been held entitled for transport allowance with DA with other components for the purpose of overtime allowance and the same is being paid to the applicant. So far as the contention of the applicant that the concerned employees of Mumbai Division are being given OTA by including the component of DA paid on transport allowance, the applicant has not brought any documents or relevant orders on record to establish his claim. The applicant has also cited the contents of letter dated 22.08.2012 in support of his claim. A perusal of the said letter reveals ANAND 2026.01.13 PRAKASH 15:57:23 Page 5 of 6 DUBEY +05'30' 6 that it was written by the respondents no. 3 seeking some clarifications. Thus, the contents of the said letter cannot be treated to be a decision.
9. In view of the forgoing observations, we are of the considered opinion that the applicant has utterly failed to substantiate his claim. Resultantly, Original Application No. 940/2015 is dismissed being devoid of merits.
10. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Mallika Arya) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Anand...
ANAND 2026.01.13
PRAKASH 15:57:23 Page 6 of 6
DUBEY +05'30'