Bijender Kumar Gaur v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Interest on delayed salary and retiral dues; election duty honorarium and bonus with 6% p.a. simple interest; Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench; judicial review standard under Articles 226/227 — no appellate re-appreciation, plausible view doctrine; silence on ancillary interest in earlier decree treated as declination and delay deemed condoned; res judicata on concluded claims; review jurisdiction not an appeal in disguise, error apparent on face of record; failure to sign pay bills/pre-receipts and furnish bank details causing delay; North Delhi Municipal Corporation; W.P.(C) 6090/2018; Amit Mahajan, J. with Anil Kshetarpal, J.; decision dated 13.02.2026.
What did the court decide?
While exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 over orders passed by the Tribunal, the High Court does not sit as an appellate court; interference is warranted only for jurisdictional error, violation of principles of natural justice, manifest perversity, or patent error apparent on the face of the record, and findings of fact arriving at a plausible view are not to be disturbed.