JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P4 order passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Ernakulam in C.P.No.11/2015 dated 16.12.2019.

2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the original petition are as follows:

The petitioner is a retired Railway employee, who retired from the post of caretaker in Railway Subordinate Guest house. The petitioner submits that he was subjected to 12 hours of duty per day and that he is entitled for overtime allowance for the work done beyond 8 hours. The said request of the petitioner to provide overtime allowance was not considered by the Railway management. Thereupon, the petitioner was constrained to approach the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Ernakulam, claiming an amount of Rs.13,27,018/- towards overtime allowance, by filing Ext.P1 petition as C.P.No. 11/2015. Ext.P2 reply statement was filed by the Railway management denying the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner submits that going by Rule 8(3) (b) & (c) of the Railway Servants (Hours of Work and Period of Rest) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 2005'), the standard duty hours of caretakers of res