Order : AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD, J. 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- 2. The petitioner, an employee of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) bearing No. 110201872, holding the rank of Sub-Inspector (Executive), has approached this Court seeking appropriate directions for grant of weekly leave and compensation/monetary benefits for the period during which he was compelled to work continuously without availing his weekly offs. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite continuous service, the petitioner has not been granted any weekly leave, and has been compelled to perform duties throughout the week without rest. It is contended that under the applicable service rules and labour welfare principles, every employee is entitled to a weekly off, and in cases where such rest is not granted, the employee is entitled to compensatory leave or appropriate monetary benefits. Hence, the petitioner prays that the respondents be directed to compensate him for the period during which he performed duty on weekly off days. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that although the petitioner has performed duties on certain weekly off days, he has been reasonably compensated for the same by way of payment of salary or other permissible allowances in accordance with the relevant rules and administrative instructions. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. It is a settled principle that in a democratic and welfare-oriented service structure, grant of weekly rest is not a privilege but a statutory and human right aimed at safeguarding the physical and mental well- being of an employees. No employee can be compelled to work continuously without a weekly off, except under exceptional circumstances and in accordance with law. The respondents, being a disciplined employer under the Union of India, are equally bound to adhere to the service rules and welfare norms applicable to their personnel. 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Workmen of the Bombey Port Trust Vs. Trustees of the Port of Bombay reported in 1965 SCC OnLine 339 relevant paragraphs are as under :- 5. We are concerned with two sections and two Rules. The sections are 13 and 14 and the Rules 24 and 25. The whole of the matter in dispute admittedly is governed by these four provisions. Trustees of the Port of Bombay reported in 1965 SCC OnLine 339 relevant paragraphs are as under :- 5. We are concerned with two sections and two Rules. The sections are 13 and 14 and the Rules 24 and 25. The whole of the matter in dispute admittedly is governed by these four provisions. We shall begin by setting out the relevant parts of these provisions: “13. Fixing hours for a normal working day, etc.— (1) In regard to any scheduled employment minimum rates of wages in respect of which have been fixed under this Act, the appropriate Government may— (a) fix the number of hours of work which shall constitute a normal working day, inclusive of one or more specified intervals; (b) provide for a day of rest in every period of seven days which shall be allowed to all employees or to any specified class of employees and for the payment of remuneration in respect of such days of rest; (c) provide for payment of work on a day of rest at a rate not less than the overtime rate. (2) The provisions of, sub-section (1) shall, in relation to the following classes of employees, apply only to such extent and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed: (a)-(b) *** (c) employees whose employment is essentially intermittent; (d)-(e) *** (3) For the purposes of clause (c) of sub-section (2), employment of an employee is essentially intermittent when it is declared to be so by the appropriate Government on the ground that the daily hours of duty of the employee, or if there be no daily hours of duty as such for the employees, the hours of duty, normally include periods of inaction during which the employee may be on duty but is not called upon to display either physical activity or sustained attention. 14. Overtime.— (1) Where an employee, whose minimum rate of wages is fixed under this Act by the hour, by the day or by such a longer, wage-period as may be prescribed, works on any day in excess of the number of hours constituting a normal working day, the employer shall pay him for every hour or for part of an hour so worked in excess at the overtime rate fixed under this Act or under any law of the appropriate Government for the time being in force, whichever is higher. (2) Nothing in this Act shall prejudice the operation of the provisions of Section 59 of the Factories Act, 1948 in any case where those provisions are applicable.” 24. Number of hours of work which shall constitute a normal working day.— (1) The number of hours which shall constitute a normal working day shall be: (a) in the case of an adult, 9 hours, (b) in the case of a child 4½ hours. (2) The working day of an adult worker shall be so arranged that inclusive of the intervals for rest, if any, it shall not spread over more than twelve hours on any day. (3) The number of hours of work in the case of an adolescent shall be the same as that of an adult or a child according as he is certified to work as an adult or a child by a competent medical practitioner approved by the Central Government. (4) *** (4-A) No child shall be employed or permitted to work for more than 4½ hours on any day. (5) Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to affect the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948. 25. Extra wages for overtime.— (1) When a worker works in an employment for more than nine hours on any day or for more than forty-eight hours in any week, he shall, in respect of overtime work, be entitled to wages. (a) in the case of employment in agriculture, at one and a half time the ordinary rate of wages; (b) in the case of any other scheduled employment, at double the ordinary rate of wages. Explanation.—The expression ‘ordinary rate of wages’ means the basic wage plus such allowances including the cash equivalent of the advantages accruing through the concessional sale to the person employed of foodgrains and other articles as the person employed is for the time being entitled to but does not include a bonus. (2) A register showing overtime payment shall be kept in form IV. (3) Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to affect the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948.” 6. The controversy in the present case is a narrow one. It is : whether the fixing of a two hours' rest and two hours' overtime involves a breach of the two sections of the Act and the Rules quoted here? (3) Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to affect the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948.” 6. The controversy in the present case is a narrow one. It is : whether the fixing of a two hours' rest and two hours' overtime involves a breach of the two sections of the Act and the Rules quoted here? The workmen claim that under a scheme of 12-hour shifts with 8 hours' work, overtime should be atleast 3 hours, if not 4, and by fixing only two hours' overtime the Trustees are guilty of the breach of the Act and the Rules. Unfortunately the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act and the Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950 are not as clear as the corresponding provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 and they have led to long arguments before us. We shall refer to the provisions of the Factories Act later because for the present we must consider the provisions of the Act and the Rules without drawing any assistance from the Factories Act.” 8. Further in the matter of In the matter of Workmen of the Bombay Port Trust Vs. Trustees of Port of Bombay and Anr. reported in 1961 SCC OnLine SC 383 and relevant paragraph are an under :- “17. We are not prepared to accept this construction of average daily wages as average earnings per day. The daily wage has in the industrial world a definite significance in contra-distinction to weekly wages or monthly wages. The weekly wages or monthly wages of a person would not as ordinarily understood include the extra earnings of the workmen by working over-time. So also, in our opinion, the term daily wages as ordinarily understood does not include over-time earnings. If it does not include over-time earnings, can it reasonably be said that it includes the high additional earnings that a worker may receive by increasing his output above the minimum fixed? We do not think that to be a reasonable interpretation of the words “daily wages”. At the same time, we see no reason why the guaranteed minimum fixed for each workman per day should not be considered his daily wages. The piece rate system introduced for these workmen has fixed such a minimum. We do not think that to be a reasonable interpretation of the words “daily wages”. At the same time, we see no reason why the guaranteed minimum fixed for each workman per day should not be considered his daily wages. The piece rate system introduced for these workmen has fixed such a minimum. Indeed, the fixation of such a minimum wage for a piece rate system makes, it may be said, the piece rate a time rate-cum-piece rate in which the guaranteed minimum is the time rate daily wage and the extra earnings are piece rates. The argument that Rule 23 does not apply to these workmen after the introduction of the piece rate scheme must therefore be rejected. 18. As regards this period also (that is, the period from March 3, 1956 onwards) Mr Desai contended that there has been constructive payment of the workers as the guaranteed minimum was arrived at by dividing the monthly wage by 26. For the reasons for which this argument was rejected in respect of the period October, 1953 to March 2, 1956, we reject this plea of constructive payment. 19. We are therefore of opinion that the workers of categories A and B are entitled to arrears of wages for the Sundays from March 3, 1956 on the basis that the guaranteed minimum wage was the daily wage.” 9. It shall be permissible to employ persons for more than eight hours in any one day and more than forty-eight hours in any one week, provided that the average number of hours worked over a period of three weeks or less does not exceed eight hours per day and forty-eight hours per week. Article 4 of the Holidays with Pay Convention, 1970 stipulates that where a person’s length of service in any year is less than that required for full entitlement, such person shall nevertheless be entitled to paid holidays proportionate to the duration of service rendered during that year. Article 6 of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 provides that all persons to whom the Convention applies shall be entitled to an uninterrupted weekly rest period of not less than twenty-four hours within every seven-day period. Article 6 of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 provides that all persons to whom the Convention applies shall be entitled to an uninterrupted weekly rest period of not less than twenty-four hours within every seven-day period. Under Articles 1 to 6 of the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981, all measures compatible with national conditions and possibilities shall be taken to ensure that the needs of workers with family responsibilities are duly considered in community planning, and to enable such workers to exercise their right to free choice of employment, with corresponding consideration of their needs in respect of terms and conditions of employment and social security. Reference may also be made to Article 3 of the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930. 10. In light of the above discussion, the respondent authorities are directed to ensure that the petitioner is granted one weekly rest day regularly in accordance with the applicable service rules. For the period during which the petitioner has already performed duties on weekly rest days, he shall be compensated either by way of compensatory leave or, where such leave cannot be feasibly granted, by payment of appropriate monetary benefits or overtime allowance as admissible under the relevant rules, subject to the condition that no such payment has already been made. 11. Consequently, the writ petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.