JUDGMENT
Nishita Mhatre, J.
1. The petition has been filed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, dismissing the Original Applications filed by the petitioners, on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to decide whether the petitioners were entitled to payment of overtime wages at the rates prescribed Under Section 59 of the Factories Act.
2. The petitioners are employed as Engineers/Melters, Section Grade Engineers/Melters, etc. in the India Government Mint i.e. Respondent No.2. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 issued orders reducing the overtime allowance and night shift allowance payable to the Petitioners and other employees. The petitioners therefore preferred Original Application Nos.1352 of 1995, 354 of 1996 and 769 of 1996 claiming that they were entitled to overtime allowance for working between 37 hours and 48 hours in a week as also for working beyond 48 hours in a week. The Central Administrative Tribunal has dismissed the Original Applications by a common judgment dated 14.1.1998 The Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Supreme court in the case of Krishan Prasad Gupta v. Controller, Printing and Stationery and concluded that this judgment of the Supreme court declares that the Central Administrative Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to decide the claims made by the petitioners.
3. It appears that the Central Administrative Tribunal had in several matters passed similar orders dismissing the claims of the employees. A similar writ petition being Writ Petition No.4917 of 2001 filed by the Supervisors working in the India Security Press has been decided by a Division Bench of this Court, to which one of us (Smt.Mhatre, J.) was a party, on 27.1.2005. The Division Bench has considered the effect of the judgment in the case of Krishan Prasad Gupta v. Controller, Printing and Stationery (supra), which related to claims made under the Payment of Wages Act which is a complete code in itself, providing for a forum for the employees to file claims under that Act. The Division Bench has also considered the judgment in the case of Union of India and Anr. v. G.K. Kokil and Ors. and has held that the Tribunal had erred in concluding that it had no jurisdiction to decide the Original Applications as to whether the petitioners were entitled to overtime allowances under the Factories Act.
4. The facts in the present case are not materially different from the facts which emerged in Writ Petition No.4917 of 2001. The learned advocate for the Respondents fairly conceded that there is no other judgment which takes a view contrary to that of the Division Bench in Writ Petition No.4917 of 2001. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Division Bench in the aforesaid case, we allow the writ petition. The impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside and the applications are remanded to the Tribunal for hearing them afresh.
5. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs.