O R D E R
Shri Saiyed Jafar Ishtiaque, counsel for the applicants and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, counsel for the respondents are present and heard.
2. The instant original application has been filed seeking following reliefs: -
"8.1 To issue a writ, order or direction in nature of mandamus directing the respondents to calculate the OTA after adding the HRA, TA and SFA since 01-01- 2006 and pay the arrears with interest accrued on it.
1
2
8.2 To issue such other and further order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the present case.
8.3 To award the cost of the Original Application to the applicants."
3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant No. 1 is the association and representing the employees of Small Arms Factory. The applicants were drawing Over Time Allowance by including all allowances such as HRA, CCA, TA and SFA. However, vide notification dated 26.06.2009, the respondent No. 1 ordered to discontinue inclusion of other allowances while calculating the Over Time Allowance. The grievance of the applicants is against the exclusion of HRA, Transport Allowance (TA) and Small Family Allowance (SFA) from the calculation of Overtime Allowance (OTA) pursuant to memorandum dated 26.06.2009 w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The applicants contend that such exclusion is contrary to Section 59(2) of the Factories Act, 1948, as held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in W.P. No. 609/2011 and connected matters. In this regard, the applicants have moved representations dated 24.03.2025, 29.03.2025 and 08.09.2025 before the respondents but with no result. The respondents, however, not considered the claim of the applicants on the ground that the issue was pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Aggrieved with the action on the part of respondents, the applicants have filed the present Original Application.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the issue now stands finally decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & others vs. Heavy Vehicles Factory Employees' Union & another (Civil Appeal Nos. 5185-5192 of 2016), decided on 20.01.2026, whereby the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court has attained finality. Accordingly, it is prayed that appropriate direction be issued to the respondents to consider the pending representations in the light of aforesaid judgment.
3
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the action was taken by the respondents on the pending representations of applicants only on account of pendency of the SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In view of the final judgment dated 20.01.2026, he has no objection if a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider the grievance of the applicants in accordance with law in light of the said decision.
6. In view of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, I am of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the present OA pending at this stage. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the claim, the O.A. stands disposed of with the direction to respondents to consider the representations dated 24.03.2025, 29.03.2025 and 08.09.2025 in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in W.P. No. 609/2011 and connected matters, as affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & others vs. Heavy Vehicles Factory Employees' Union & another vide judgment dated 20.01.2026, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the applicants forthwith.
7. There shall be no order as to costs. All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, shall be deemed to have been disposed of.
(Rajnish Kumar Rai) Member (Judicial)
/M.M/