Roop Kumar v. Delhi Transco Limited Through Cmd & ORS.

$~171 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6500/2026 & CM APPL. 32044/2026 ROOP KUMAR .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Mahesh Srivastava and Mr. V.M.

Srivastava, Advocates.

versus DELHI TRANSCO LIMITED THROUGH CMD & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Puja Dewan, Advocate for R-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 13.05.2026 1.

The Petitioner, who retired from the post of General Manager/Chief Engineer, is aggrieved by the action of Respondent No. 1 in not fixing his pension in accordance with the recommendations of the 7th Wage Revision Committee.1 The present petition specifically assails Office Order dated 10th January, 2024, which reads as under:

"OFFICE ORDER The Board of Directors of Delhi Transco Limited vide its Resolution No.1312.6 dated 07.12.2023 has approved that since new pay system i.e. Pay Matrix has been introduced instead of Grade Pay, hence, no change in the pay system prior to 01.01.2016 is to be made. However, the pay of all the Chief Engineers/ General Managers including retirees of the period prior to 01.01.2016 be fixed in the pay scale of Pay Level-13 of WRC corresponding to Pay Level-15 of 07th CPC w.e.f. 01.01.2016,( Sl. No. 79-WRC report-Table-II). This issues with the approval of Competent Authority." 2.

It is noted that, on 5th May, 2026, in W.P.(C) 17539/2025 and 1 "WRC"

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:37:00

connected matters, this Court set aside the aforesaid Office Order dated 10th January, 2024 on the ground that the impugned decision did not reflect due consideration of the relevant material placed before the authority. This Court had observed that the absence of a reasoned analysis of the recommendations of the 7th WRC rendered the decision susceptible to challenge on the ground of arbitrariness.

3.

In light of the foregoing, and considering that the present petition also challenges the very same Office Order, this Court, without delving into the merits of the controversy and while reserving all rights and contentions of the parties, disposes of the present petition with the following direction 3.1.

The impugned Office Order dated 10th January, 2024, is set aside. 3.2.

The Petitioner shall submit a fresh and comprehensive representation to the Respondents within a period of two weeks from today. 3.3 Upon receipt thereof, the competent authority shall consider the same in accordance with law, having due regard to the Petitioner's contentions, particularly those based on the recommendations of the 7th WRC, and pass a reasoned order within a period of eight weeks thereafter. 3.4 In case the recommendations are accepted, necessary correction shall be made in the Petitioner's pension.

3.5 In case of any adverse decision, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to assail the same, in accordance with law.

4.

With the above direction, the petition is disposed of along with pending application(s).

SANJEEV NARULA, J MAY 13, 2026/as The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:37:00