ORDER : Dinesh Mehta, J. I.A.No.01/2024 in S.B. Writ Contempt No. 1027/2018:- 1. The present application has been filed by the applicant – Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Retired Employees Association seeking their impleadment in the present contempt petition. 2. Having heard learned Senior Counsel and considering that the Association is representing all the retired employees of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘Corporation’), the application is allowed so that a common order, which can be made applicable to all the retired employees with common consensus can be passed. The applicant is allowed to intervene in the present contempt proceedings. 3. The amended cause title is taken on record. 4. Present contempt petition so also other petitions enlisted in the Schedule appended herewith which involve identical allegation and facts are being disposed of conjointly by this Common order. The Schedule shall be treated as part and parcel of the order instant. 5. The petitioners herein have raised a grievance that though the respondent – Corporation was under the order of this Court to clear their retiral dues in accordance with law in time bound manner, but the amount which the respondent – Corporation has calculated is not in accordance with law and contrary to record. 6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire record and details which are necessary for calculation of the due payment is with the respondent – Corporation and despite claiming the copies under Right to Information Act, the same have not been provided. It was argued that the petitioners have unverified input/information about their claim and therefore, they cannot even properly challenge legality of such adjudication made by the Corporation even if they wish so to do. 7. While informing that pursuant to the order dated 07.05.2024 passed by this Court, the Corporation has determined and sent copy of such determination to each of the employees, who had lodged their claim, learned counsel argued that the petitioners and other retired employee are dissatisfied with such unilateral determination. 8. An attempt was made to point out the discrepancies, but the Court expressed its inability to enter into such arena having regard to its limitations in contempt jurisdiction. The petitioners were asked to take their remedies before Civil Court or Labour Court etc. 9. Mr. 8. An attempt was made to point out the discrepancies, but the Court expressed its inability to enter into such arena having regard to its limitations in contempt jurisdiction. The petitioners were asked to take their remedies before Civil Court or Labour Court etc. 9. Mr. Punia, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the Labour Court/competent Court are neither having expertise to calculate the overtime amount and other dues of the employees nor will they be able to judiciously undertake such exercise, on account of the workload they are already burdened with. 10. Mr. G.R. Punia, learned Senior Counsel for the Association therefore, suggested that the calculation of the amount payable to each of the employees under various heads such as overtime allowances; night allowances; double duty allowances; weekly raised allowances; etc. be got done through a retired accountant at the depot level so as to ensure fair assessment of the amount. He contended that the same would ward-off unnecessary burden on the Courts and statutory or departmental authorities given that the number of claims will be in hundreds. 11. The Financial Advisor of the respondent - Corporation however submitted that the respondent - Corporation is ready to earmark one of its accountant at each depot to consider the claim of the retired employees. 12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there are large number of claims and the Labour Court are already swamped in pending dockets, this Court feels that it would be expedient to get the claims of the employees settled by way of arbitration so as to eliminate the element of bias or prolonged decision. Everyone present in the Court agreed and gave their suggestions in this regard. 13. It was suggested that arbitration be done through retired accountant of the Corporation who shall be nominated (by the Managing Director of the respondent – Corporation) for each of the depot. Neither Mr. Punia nor Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for the respondent – Corporation showed any objection(s). 14. 13. It was suggested that arbitration be done through retired accountant of the Corporation who shall be nominated (by the Managing Director of the respondent – Corporation) for each of the depot. Neither Mr. Punia nor Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for the respondent – Corporation showed any objection(s). 14. Hence, all these petitions are disposed of with following directions:- (i) All the retired employees [who had filed their claims pursuant to order dated 07.05.2024 passed in the case of Dungav Ram (S.B. Writ Contempt No. 1027/2018) or the order passed in the case of Tara Chand Panchal (S.B. Writ Contempt No. 1099/2019)] shall file their objection(s)/claim(s) for determination of their retiral dues and other benefits within a period of two months. (ii) The claims be filed in the office of the Chief Manager of their respective depot (from which depot the concerned employee has retired) in two sets. It will be required of the Chief Manager to give receipt of the claims so filed with seal and date. (iii) The Managing Director of the respondent – Corporation shall within two months from today nominate one retired accountant or higher official (Retd.) at each depot, to adjudicate the claims so filed. (iv) Such nominated retired employee shall work as an ‘Arbitrator’. (v) It will be required of the Chief Manager of each Depot to provide a befitting place where the Arbitrator can have his sitting/ hearing. (vi) All the claims filed by the employees shall be sent to the Arbitrator, who shall fix the date of hearing as per his convenience under intimation to both the parties. (vii) It will be required of the respondent – Corporation to make entire service record of each of the employees, whichever is necessary for the purpose of determination of claim, available to the Arbitrator. (viii) An honorarium of Rs.500/- shall be paid by each of the employees/claimants to the Arbitrator, while the Corporation shall also pay equal amount to him. (ix) Out of the amount mentioned in clause (viii) above, half of the amount (Rs.250/-) shall be paid by both the parties to the Arbitrator at the time of first hearing. The remaining amount of (Rs.250/- each) shall be paid by the parties immediately before the final award is passed by the Arbitrator. (x) The respondent – Corporation shall also be free to file its objections regarding the claim so lodged by the employees. The remaining amount of (Rs.250/- each) shall be paid by the parties immediately before the final award is passed by the Arbitrator. (x) The respondent – Corporation shall also be free to file its objections regarding the claim so lodged by the employees. (xi) The Arbitrator shall take summary proceedings and pass award indicating therein the claim wise details of the amount payable. (xii) With the consent of all the parties, it is hereby ordered that the determination so made by the said Arbitrator shall be final and binding on all the parties. No legal remedy against such order shall be permissible to any party. (xiii) Once the amount is determined by the Arbitrator, it will be required of the respondent – Corporation to pay the same on the basis of the priority as given in the circular dated 03.11.2021 issued by the Corporation. (xiv) Needless to mention that in case of a deceased employee his wife or legal representative shall be free to pursue the claim. 15. Notices of contempt are hereby discharged. 16. All the captioned contempt petitions stand disposed of in terms of the above directions.