Nafr High Court
Case Details
Page 1 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) SISTA SOMAYAJULU Digitally signed by SISTA SOMAYAJULU Date: 2025.09.12 18:33:47 +0530 2025:CGHC:46530-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2325 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Raghunath, Aged about 63 years (at the time of filing of the O.A), S/o Late Shri Ratan, C/o Bimla Senapati, Sirsabhata, G-Cabin, Charoda, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent WPS No. 2340 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Page 2 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) Kislal, Aged 60 years, S/o Late Baratu, R/o Behind Indrajeet Kirana Store, Ward No.4, Dadar Charoda, P.O BMY, District Durg 490025 --- Respondent WPS No. 2341 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus
Legal Reasoning
Durga Biswas, W/o Late Shri V.K. Biswas, aged 43 yrs, R/o Qr.No.102 A, Railway Colony, Bhilai-3, Post Bhilai-3, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 490021 --- Respondent WPS No. 2342 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Guha, Aged 55 years, S/o Tijau, R/o Qr.No.84 D, BMY Charoda, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 490025 --- Respondent Page 3 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) WPS No. 2343 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Revati Karwa, W/o Baner, Aged about 46 years, C/o Store 12, Near Shiv Mandir, Bhilai-3, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 490021 --- Respondent WPS No. 2486 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Arjun, Aged 64 years, S/o Late Jabar Singh, R/o Village Rahenbhata, Post Office Malishira, Police Station Titlagarh, District Bolangir (Orissa) 767033 --- Respondent WPS No. 2488 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 Page 4 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Devanand, Aged 57 years, S/o Ravi, R/o Qr.No.604 C, Zone-I, BMY Charoda, Bhilai, District Durg, C.G. 490025 --- Respondent WPS No. 2505 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Ramnath (Died) Through Legal Heirs 1.A Joniya Devi, W/o Late Ramnath, Aged about 68 years 1.B Rakesh Sharma, S/o Late Ramnath, Aged about 35 years 1.C Harkesh Sharma, S/o Late Ramnath, Aged about 40 years 1.D Kameshwar Sharma, S/o Late Ramnath, Aged about 49 years 1.E (a) Maya Sharma, W/o Late Manoj Sharma, Aged about 40 years (b) Ankit Sharma, S/o Late Manoj Sharma, Aged about 17 years (c) Rishi Sharma, S/o Late Manoj Sharma, Aged about 14 years Both are minors through their natural guardian mother Maya Sharma Page 5 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) All are R/o Sector-11, Zone-2, Balaji Nagar, Khursipar, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh-490021. --- Respondents WPS No. 2508 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus K. Bhaskarudu (Died) Through Legal Heir 1(A) K. Krishnaveni, W/o Late Bhaskardu, Aged about 68 years, R/o C/o Shri J.M. Lingam, Old Bhilai, Post Bhilai-3, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent WPS No. 2511 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Balakram, Aged 51 years, S/o Late Sadashiv, R/o Qr.No.D-620, Zone-I, Charoda, Bhilai, District Durg 490025. --- Respondent Page 6 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) WPS No. 2518 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus B. Laxmi, Aged 65 yrs, W/o Late B. Krishnamurty, R/o Jagdamba Chowk, Purana Bhilai, Post Bhilai-3, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 490021. --- Respondent WPS No. 2531 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Dasarath, Aged 57 years, S/o Late Suru, R/o Qr.No.C-627, BMY Charoda, Bhilai, District Durg 490025 --- Respondent WPS No. 2532 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 Page 7 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Suresh, Aged 56 yrs, S/o Shri Raju, R/o Qr.No.95 D, Bhilai-3, Post Bhilai-3, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 490021. --- Respondent AND WPS No. 2537 of 2021 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 2. South East Central Railway, through the General Manager, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495004 3. Divisional Railway Manager, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 4. Regional Personnel Officer, C/o S.E.C. Rly., DRM Office, Fafadih, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492008 --- Petitioners Versus Devanand, Aged 57 years, S/o Ratiram, R/o Ward No.21, Indra Nagar, Near Shukla Aata Chakki, BMY Charoda, District Durg 490025 --- Respondent For Petitioners : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General of India, Mr. Rishabhdeo Singh, Advocate and Mr. Bhupendra Pandey, Central Government Counsel. For Respondents : Mr. Sudeep Johri and Mr. J.K. Gupta, Advocates. Division Bench: - Hon'ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Shri Radhakishan Agrawal, JJ. Order on Board (11/09/2025) Page 8 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J. 1. This order will govern the disposal of WPS No.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected writ petitions. 2. Since common question of law and fact is involved in all these writ petitions, they were clubbed together, heard together and are being
Decision
disposed of by this common order. 3. This batch of writ petitions questions legality, validity and correctness of order dated 20-11-2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Circuit sittings: Bilaspur, by which the original applications filed by the respondents herein have been allowed and order dated 4-3-2015 has been set aside and the Union of India has been directed to make payment of overtime allowance to the railway servants/respondents herein as claimed by them within 60 days. These writ petitions eventually also question legality, validity and correctness of order dated 7-12-2020 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in the review applications filed by the Union of India, by which the learned CAT has dismissed the review applications finding no merit. (For the sake of convenience, W.P.(S)No.2340/2021 is being taken as lead case.) 4. The respondent herein/original applicant was appointed on 24-12- 1972 and stood retired on 3-9-2012 from the Department of Engineering. It is the case of the respondent/original applicant that Page 9 of 15 (WPSNo.2325/2021 and thirteen other connected cases) after the stipulated period of duty, he had worked overtime between 2007 to 2010 for which overtime allowance was payable, but it was not paid and thereafter, he along with other original applicants filed original application on 18-4-2017 claiming overtime allowance which was processed by the Personnel Branch of the Office of the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, S.E.C. Railway, Raipur, and the claim of 19 applicants for overtime allowance was denied by the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer due to being older and belated claim by order dated 4-3-2015 leading to filing of original applications before the CAT on the ground that payment of overtime allowance is a recurring cause of action and therefore their claim is absolutely justified and further processing of the claim caused delay and laches, which the Union of India has opposed holding that the claim is stale and not available. However, pursuant to the order of CAT dated 9- 10-2018, documents relating to overtime allowance were filed vide Annexure R-1 and thereafter, the matter was considered by the CAT and the CAT considered the dispute regarding non-payment of overtime allowance to the original applicants on performing extra duty hours in extra time. 5. The learned CAT relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India and others v. Tarsem Singh1 and M.R. Gupta v. Union of India2 came to the conclusion that the Railway Department has calculated the overtime of the applicants in the year 2012 and ultimately rejected their claim in 2015 by order