Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Pratima K. Gupta, Judicial Member
Mata Deen – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicants challenge 12-hour rosters, claim ota under 2015 circular. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. cabinmen classified 'continuous', entitled to 8-hour duty and ota. (Para 4 , 8) |
| 3. prior rulings bind, affirm continuous duty for cabinmen/gatemen. (Para 5 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. reject remittal; direct ota payment due to delay and retirement. (Para 6 , 11) |
| 5. oa allowed, classify as continuous, pay ota within 12 weeks. (Para 7 , 12 , 13) |
ORDER (ORAL)
The applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are retired employees of Railways as Cabinman and applicant Nos. 3 to 6 at the relevant point in time were working as Cabinman with the respondents.
2. Briefly stating, the applicants, in terms of the R.B.E. Circular No. 131/2015 (Annexure A/2) placed at page 21, are required to perform duties of 8 hours and beyond the said working hours, they are entitled for Over Time Allowance (OTA). With respect to their claim, the applicants preferred representations (Annexure A/19). Learned counsel for the applicants confirms that all the applicants have preferred the representations, which were pending consideration at the relevant point in time and those are pending consideration till today even after five years of filing of th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
