(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 V e r s u s

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 O R D E R 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 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 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 iss