DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER Vs. DAMODARDAS GOVINDBHAI WANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Heard forthwith.

(2.) THE petitioner is impugning the order dated 14-5-2003 in Application l. R. No. 2/80 of 1999. That was an application by 7 applicants of whom three applicants namely Rajkumar, Mukund and V. K. Naik have withdrawn their claims. By the impugned order, the learned Labour Court was pleased to allow the application of four remaining applicants who are now respondent nos. 1 to 4 before this Court. The case of the applicants I. S. that they were working as Assistant Station Master in Western Railway. It was their conten-tion that apart from the hours of duty until relieved they put in two additional hours of work which they were entitled to claim as over time. This claim was opposed by the petitioners herein on the ground firstly that the applicants were not workman within the meaning of section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Their further objection is that the applicants are not entitled to any relief as there was no settlement agreement or other condition of services under which they were entitled to two hours of over time. In the written statement, it was pointed out that the applicants were continuous workers and in terms of the regulations they were duty bound to put in 108 hours of work in 14 days.

(3.) THE learned Labour Court proceeded on the footing that under Rule 5 of section 4 of the Hours of Employment Regulation and if the award of the railway Tribunal is considered, it would be apparent that for the purpose of handing over and taking over charge, in relation to the cash, the applicants were entitled to the credit of two hours Application No. 2/169 of 1990, 2/ 194, 195, 494 of 1988 wherein in similar circumstances it has been held that the applicants therein were entitled to overtime for two hours per day which orders has not been interfered with. Reliance next was placed in the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1005 of 1986 decided on 1-2-1988 wherein the learned judge held that the workman therein were entitled to credit of two hours for the purpose of handing over and taking over the cash amount. After so holding, the learned Labour Court held that on the facts of the case as claim pertains to two hours overtime for counting cash and handing over the same to the reliever, therefore, the facts being similar, applicants Station Superintendent/assistant Station Master are entitled to overtime of two hours per day for the period mentioned in the annexures and accordingly passed the impugned order.