CAT Gives Railway 30 Days To Decide 35 Employees’ Claim For Overtime During Destination Halts

The applicants, railway employees, alleged that the respondents had not treated the period of halt at destination as duty when calculating overtime allowance.

They stated that similarly placed employees had raised the issue before other Benches of the Tribunal and that they had submitted a joint representation dated 14 August 2026 seeking overtime allowance, which remained pending.

They sought a direction for the respondents to consider and decide that representation

The respondents did not oppose a time-bound decision on the representation in accordance with law.

The Tribunal identified no specific statute, regulation, or named precedent as the basis for its order.

It directed the competent authority to decide the pending representation in light of directions issued by other Benches of the Tribunal and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within a prescribed period

The order did not state or decide the substantive legal test for entitlement to overtime allowance.

The applicants asked the Tribunal to resolve their pending representation in the manner adopted in matters involving similarly placed employees.

The respondents’ counsel had no objection to a time-bound decision.

In light of those submissions, the Tribunal granted procedural relief by requiring the competent authority to consider the representation and issue a reasoned order; it did not examine the merits of the overtime claim or determine whether destination halt periods constituted duty

The applicants’ substantive entitlement to overtime allowance was left undecided