Ratan Lal Vs Manoj Joshi and Others

¶1

$~8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 22^nd July, 2026

¶4

- CONT.CAS(C) 565/2022 & CM APPL. 24313/2022, CM APPL. 19910/2025

¶5

RATAN LAL .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, Mr. Kunal Anand, Mr. Arnav Mehta and Ms. Aditi Rathore, Advocates Mob: 9810400407 Email: [email protected]

¶6

versus MANOJ JOSHI AND OTHERS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Mr. Prashant Rawat and Ms. Ruchita Srivastva, Advocates for R-1 to 3 Mob: 9910396352 Email: [email protected] Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Mr. Manish Kumar Singh and Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advocates for R-4 Mob: 9810056263

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J (ORAL):

¶8

The present petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 17^th June, 2020, passed by this Court in CONT.CAS(C) 252/2020, titled as Ratan Lal Versus Durga Shankar Mishra & Ors. 2. Attention of this Court has been drawn to the order dated 16^th September, 2025, passed by this Court in the present contempt petition, wherein, it has been recorded as follows:

¶9

Signature Not Verified

¶10

Page 1 of 5

¶11

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 5.07.2026 10:41:48

¶12

“xxx xxx xxx

¶13

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent draws attention of this Court to order dated 17.04.2025 passed by Predecessor Bench of this Court, whereby it was recorded that learned counsel for the petitioner had narrowed down the issues to opening of sealed cover of the DPC and the Transport Allowance.

¶14

3. Today, an order dated 01.08.2025 has been handed up in Court today by learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and the same is taken on record, whereby it is recorded as under:-

¶15

“The president is pleased to promote Shri Ratan Lal Executive Engineer (E&M) (Retd.) to the petitioner has been promoted to the grade of Superintending Engineer (E&M) on notional basis w.e.f. 01.11.2007 in the pre-revised pay scale of R. 37400-67000/- with grade pay 8700/- (equivalent to Level 13 of the Pay Matrix) against the panel year 2005-06.

¶16

2. The notional promotion, notional pay fixation and revision or pension shall be as per the extant rules specified by the DoPT on this subject.

¶17

3. This issues with the approval of Hon’ble Minister, MoHUA.”

¶18

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that so far as DPC is concerned, the same has been complied with and the petitioner has been given notional promotion and the consequential benefits shall follow as per the rules specified by the DoPT. Insofar as the Transport Allowance is concerned, the same as per office memorandum (OM) would not be applicable to an employee who has been suspended and had not been coming to service and submits that the said OMs have been placed on record.

¶19

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner draws attention of this Court to reply dated 19.03.2021 to an RTI application, wherein it is recorded that grant of NFU in the grade JS will be considered only if promotion is granted in the grade of SE (E&M) as per rules. It is submitted that in view of the aforesaid office order, the petitioner has been granted promotion in the aforesaid grade and therefore, the consequential benefit of granting NFU in the grade of JS should follow.

¶20

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 5.07.2026 10:41:48

¶21

Page 2 of 5

¶22

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent seeks time to file a response to the aforesaid submissions on behalf of the petitioner. Let the same be filed before the next date of hearing, with an advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

7. List on 12.12.2025.”

¶24

Perusal of the aforesaid order clearly shows that vide order dated 17^th April, 2025, a clear statement had been made on behalf of the petitioner that the issue raised in the present contempt petition has been narrowed down to the issues of opening of sealed cover of the Departmental Promotion Committee (“DPC”), grant of Non-Functional Upgradation (“NFU”) and the issue of grant of Transport Allowance.

¶25

This Court has been handed over copies of the Office Order dated 01^st August, 2025, wherein, the petitioner after opening of the sealed cover of the DPC has been promoted to the grade of Superintending Engineer (E&M) on notional basis with effect from 01^st November, 2007. The said Office Order dated 01^st August, 2025, reads as under:

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Page 3 of 5

¶28

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 5.07.2026 10:41:48

¶29

Subsequently, an Office Order dated 10^th March, 2026 has been issued by the Directorate General, Central Public Works Department (“CPWD”), Government of India, wherein, NFU in the grade of Joint Secretary has also been granted to the petitioner with effect from 01^st April, 2011. The said order dated 10^th March, 2026, reads as under:

¶30

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 5.07.2026 10:41:48

¶31

Page 4 of 5

¶32

This Court notes the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the aforesaid amounts are yet to be released.

¶33

Accordingly, direction is given to the respondents to release the requisite amounts to the petitioner in terms of the aforesaid orders, expeditiously, within a period of four weeks, from today. 8. As regards the issue of Transport Allowance, as raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court notes that in the order dated 16^th September, 2025, passed by this Court in the present petition, it has already been noted that the Transport Allowance is not payable to an employee, who has been suspended and who had not been coming to service.

¶34

At this stage, this Court notes the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that there has been a great delay in release of the requisite amounts to the petitioner, despite time bound directions being there, and, thus, interest be paid to the petitioner.

¶35

However, it is to be noted that there are no directions for grant of interest, to the petitioner.

¶36

Thus, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the delayed release of payment by the respondent, the petitioner is at liberty to seek remedies in accordance with law, for the purposes of release of interest, if so entitled.

¶37

Accordingly, noting the aforesaid, the present petition, along with pending applications, is disposed of.

¶38

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶39

JULY 22, 2026 ak

¶40

Signature Not Verified

¶41

Page 5 of 5

¶42

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 5.07.2026 10:41:48

Ratan Lal v. Manoj Joshi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratan Lal v. Manoj Joshi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Offset Printers and Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mrityunjay Kumar Jha

V K Vashisht Vs T v Somnathana & Anr.

Trustline Securities Ltd. Vs Daya Shankar Panday

Shruti Jain and Anr. Vs Manoj Jain

Franklin Institute of Medical Science Vs Anil Mittal

Kirti Vasan Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Breejesh Nirula Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ifci Venture Capital Funds Ltd. Vs Malikarjun Baswantrao Patil & Ors.

V K Vashisht Vs T v Somnathana & Anr.

Trustline Securities Ltd. Vs Daya Shankar Panday

Shruti Jain and Anr. Vs Manoj Jain

Mr Jagjot Singh Vs Mrs Pawan Preet

Komal Vs Mohit Kumar

Dc Murmu Vs Tv Somanathan and Ors.