Full Judgment Text
$~J
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment pronounced on: 25.09.2025
W.P.(C) 10312/2025, CM APPL. 55857/2025
+
MANISH KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sushant Singh, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Bhaskar Chhakara, Advocate for
R-1 to R-3.
W.P.(C) 11317/2025, CM APPLs. 49859/2025, 51660/2025
+
VISHAL KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sushant Singh, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Bhaskar Chhakara, Advocate for
R-1 to R-3.
Mr. Shiven Varma, Advocate for R-4
and R-5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
JUDGMENT
1. These petitions raise a common grievance, viz ., the denial by the
respondents of the petitioners’ applications for scholarships under the
National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme for 2025-26.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND IN W.P(C) 11317/2025
2. The petitioner is a 25-year-old student who has secured an
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 1 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
unconditional offer to pursue MSc in Economics at the London School of
Economics and Political Science. He applied for financial assistance under
the National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme 2025-26, administered by
the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. It is his case that despite
fulfilling all eligibility criteria – age, caste, academic merit, and family
income (well below the Rs. 8 lakh threshold) his name appeared in the
rejected list dated 01.07.2025 at Serial No. 204, with the reason cited as
“ Income Certificate of valid FY not furnished” .
3. It is submitted that the petitioner furnished a valid Income Certificate
issued on 21.04.2025 by the Revenue Department, Government of NCT of
Delhi, Office of the District Magistrate, Saket, South District, Delhi,
declaring the annual family income as Rs.3,00,000 duly supported by a
notarised affidavit and income certificates of previous years.
4. It is submitted that the petitioner personally visited the office of
respondent no. 3 to ascertain the reasons for rejection. During the meeting,
respondent no. 3 orally stated that the Income Certificate furnished by the
petitioner did not explicitly refer to or mention the financial year and,
therefore, the application had been rejected. It is further submitted that the
practice followed by the respondent nos. 4 and 5 is to issue income
certificates valid for six months, which do not expressly indicate the
financial year.
5. While countering the contentions of respondent nos. 1 to 3 ( viz. that,
since the Income Certificate was issued on 21.04.2025 and not prior to
01.04.2025, the income mentioned therein should be considered as
pertaining to the financial year 2024–2025), it is submitted that the
petitioner applied for a family income certificate on 16.04.2025, i.e., after
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 2 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
the issuance of the National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme for 2025–
26, and the certificate was duly issued on 21.04.2025. It is submitted that the
mere factum of the certificate being dated 21.04.2025, and not prior to
01.04.2025, cannot be a ground to deny consideration of the said Income
Certificate.
6. It is further submitted that Clause 8(e) of the NOS Guidelines
provides that applicants may submit grievances within 30 days of
declaration of results. While the Guidelines acknowledge the right of
applicants to raise grievances, no express mechanism for handling such
grievances has been put in place, nor is there any system for generating a
complaint or grievance number. The petitioner made a grievance redressal
representation within the stipulated period; however, no response or decision
has been communicated by the respondents to date.
7. Being aggrieved therewith, the petitioner has filed the present
petition.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND IN W.P(C) 10312/2025
8. The petitioner in W.P.(C) 10312/2025 is a 23-year-old student who
has secured an unconditional offer to pursue MSc in Computer Science at
the University of Glasgow. He duly applied for the National Overseas
Scholarship (NOS) under the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment. It
is the petitioner’s case that despite fulfilling all the eligibility criteria - age,
caste, academic merit, and family income (being well below the prescribed
threshold of ₹8,00,000) his name appeared in the rejection list dated
01.07.2025 at Serial No. 157. The reason assigned against his name was:
“Income Certificate of valid FY not furnished.”
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 3 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
9. The income certificate relied upon by the petitioner was issued by the
the Revenue Department of the Government of NCT of Delhi, office of
District Magistrate, Rohini : North West District on 08.12.2023, declaring
the annual family income as only ₹96,000/ -. It is submitted that the said
certificate clearly pertained to the Financial Year 2023-24, which was the
relevant year under the NOS Scheme. It is again emphasised that the
GNCTD issues income certificate with six months validity, which do not
expressly indicate the financial year. The petitioner has also relied upon
subsequent/other certificates issued by the concerned authorities of the
GNCTD, in support of his application for scholarship. Other certificates
relied upon by the petitioner are annexed as Annexure P-2 (Colly).
10. It is submitted that the rejection of the petitioner’s application is
therefore incorrect, and contrary to the Scheme Guidelines. The income
certificate dated 08.12.2023 was valid for FY 2023-24, and was
accompanied by a family income affidavit. Despite this, the respondents
disregarded the document and rejected the petitioner’s candidature.
11. On 03.07.2025, under Clause 8(e) of the NOS Guidelines the
petitioner submitted a representation by email to respondent no. 1 and
requested reconsideration of his case. However, having received no response
from the concerned respondent, the petitioner filed the present petition.
12. Vide order dated 21.07.2025 this Court in the present writ petition
directed the concerned respondents to decide the said representation
submitted by the petitioner within a period of 10 days from the date of the
order.
13. Pursuant to the aforesaid directions the respondent no. 1 passed Order
dated 29.07.2025 thereby observing that rejection of the application of Sh.
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 4 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
Manish Kumar is in accordance with clause 8 (c) of the Guidelines of the
NOS. The relevant observations made in the said order dated 29.07.2025 are
reproduced as under –
“4. FINDINGS
4.1. And whereas, upon detailed examination, the following facts are
clear:
a. The NOS Scheme mandates submission of an income certificate
specifically for FY 2023-24.
b. The income certificate furnished by the Applicant does not explicitly
mention the FY to which the income pertains.
c. As the certificate was issued after 01.04.2023 and before 31.03.2024
i.e. after the completion of FY 2022-23 and before the end of the ongoing
FY 2023-24 and does not clearly indicate the applicable year of the
income, the income mentioned in the certificate was considered as
pertaining to the FY 2022-23.
d. Without a clear indication of the relevant financial year, the certificate
cannot be presumed to reflect income for FY 2023-24 and hence fails to
satisfy Clause 8 (c) of the NOS Scheme Guidelines.
e. The grievance was not received through the official channel but has
been considered in the interest of fairness.
f. The rejection of the application was based on a valid ground and was
in conformity with the clause 8 (c) of the Scheme Guidelines.
4.2. And whereas, the Applicant has argued before the Hon'ble Court
that this is a hyper-technical ground and that rejection defeats the
objective of the Scheme. While the Ministry acknowledges the importance
of substantive justice, the integrity and fairness of a highly competitive,
merit and need-based scheme like NOS hinges upon uniform adherence
to documented criteria. Relaxing the requirement for one candidate
would undermine the principle of equality among all applicants.
4.3. And whereas, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment is
committed to ensuring fair, transparent and efficient implementation of
the NOS scheme.
5. Now therefore, in view of the facts mentioned above and after careful
consideration of the documents uploaded by the Applicant by 02nd May
2025 i.e. the closing date of the portal, relevant provisions of the scheme,
with the approval of the competent authority in the Ministry, it has been
decided that the rejection of the application of Sh. Manish Kumar is in
accordance with clause 8 (c) of the Guidelines of the NOS as the
Applicant failed to submit an income certificate indicating gross family
income for the financial year 2023-24, as mandatorily required under the
relevant provisions of the Scheme Guidelines.
Accordingly, the representation of the applicant is disposed of.”
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 5 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS
14. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the income
certificates furnished by the petitioners suffer from no infirmity.
15. It is the petitioners’ case that the respondent authorities have denied
them the benefit of the scholarship on wholly untenable grounds. The
respondents are insisting upon income certificates in formats that are at
variance with the practice and procedure adopted by the GNCTD for
issuance of such certificates. It is submitted that a minor technicality is
jeopardising a once-in-a-lifetime academic opportunity for the petitioners
despite their merit. It is further emphasised that such an approach frustrates
the constitutional mandate under Article 46 of the Constitution of India,
which obliges the State to promote the educational and economic interests of
the weaker sections of society.
16. Both the petitioners have emphasised that the deadline for the
petitioners to enrol in the concerned foreign universities will expire soon and
irreparable prejudice will be caused to the petitioner if relief is not granted.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1/UNION
OF INDIA
17. A counter affidavit dated 12.08.2025 has been filed on behalf of the
respondent no. 1 in W.P.(C) 11317/2025, wherein it has been averred that
petitioner had submitted an income certificate dated 21.04.2025. The said
certificate was valid only for six months and did not specify the relevant
financial year. It is submitted that Clause 8(c) of the NOS Scheme
Guidelines requires submission of an income certificate indicating gross
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 6 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
annual family income for the financial year 2023–2024. It is submitted that
since the certificate was issued after 31.03.2025, it was assumed that the
same pertained to the financial year 2024–2025 and not 2023–2024, as
required.
18. It is contended that that since the petitioner failed to provide the
required income certificate for the relevant financial year, the rejection of
his application was justified.
19. It is further submitted that Clause 8(e) of the NOS Scheme Guidelines
provides that grievances may be raised within 30 days from publication of
the result. The grievance submitted by the petitioner is currently under
consideration of the Ministry and will be duly responded to as per the
prescribed procedure. Hence, the present Writ Petition is premature.
20. Similarly, a counter affidavit dated 12.08.2025 has been filed on
behalf of the respondent no.1 in W.P.(C) 10312/2025 wherein it is averred
that Clause 8(c) of the NOS Scheme Guidelines 2025-26 requires a
certificate indicating gross annual family income for the financial year 2023-
24 during the application process. The income certificate submitted by the
petitioner, dated 08.12.2023, does not explicitly indicate the financial year.
It is submitted that since the certificate was issued after 31.03.2023 i.e. after
the completion of the Financial Year 2022-23, the income was considered to
pertain to FY 2022-23. Accordingly, it is submitted that it does not satisfy
the requirement of Clause 8(c).
21. It is submitted that although Clause 8(e) allows grievances within 30
days of result publication, it was found that the petitioner’s grievance
submitted on 03.07.2025 was sent to an incorrect email address and was
therefore not received by the Department. It is further submitted that
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 7 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
notwithstanding this procedural lapse, the Ministry has taken cognizance of
the grievance in good faith and re-examined the application and documents
in light of the Scheme provisions.
22. Learned counsel for the Union of India submitted that the NOS
Scheme is competitive and subject to strict scrutiny, and that compliance
with the mandatory requirement of furnishing an income certificate for the
specified financial year is essential.
23. It is submitted that the scheme conditions are applied uniformly to all
applicants to ensure transparency, fairness, and parity. Any relaxation
granted in one case would amount to unequal treatment and create an
uneven playing field vis-a-vis other candidates who have complied with the
requirements in letter and spirit.
24. It is submitted that during the first phase of the Selection Year 2025-
26, a total of 440 applications were received through the NOS portal. Out of
these, 268 applications were rejected on various grounds. Of these
rejections, 141 applications were specifically rejected on the ground of non-
submission of a valid income certificate, either because the certificate did
not mention the relevant financial year or was otherwise deficient. It is
contended that if the present petition is allowed, it will inevitably open the
door for similarly placed candidates to approach this Court on the basis of
the present order. This would cause grave injustice to the large pool of
applicants who have complied with the requirements of the Scheme and are
awaiting the second round of the selection process, which has already
commenced from 15.09.2025 (00:00 hours).
25. It is further emphasised that the NOS Scheme provides for 125 fresh
awards each year, subject to the availability of funds. These slots are limited
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 8 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
in number and are highly competitive. Any dilution of the eligibility norms
not only creates inequity among candidates but also prejudices those who
have complied with the requirements and are awaiting their opportunity in
the next phase of the selection process.
REASONING AND CONCLUSION
26. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties, it is quite
evident that the rejection of the petitioner’s application on the ground of
alleged infirmity or deficiency in the income certificates furnished by the
petitioners, is untenable.
27. It is not disputed that the income certificate issued by the GNCTD is
in a particular format over which the petitioner has no control. It is also not
controverted by the respondents that the only reason for the rejection of the
petitioners’ application seeking scholarship was the infirmity in their income
certificate. There is no dispute that, on all other counts, the petitioners are
eligible for the scholarship.
28. It is also a matter of record that, out of the 125 scholarship offers,
only 106 have been exhausted thus far. There is no dispute that the offers
issued by prestigious foreign educational institutes to the petitioners, shall
expire if the petitioner does not make the cut in the already concluded round
of selection.
29. The certificate furnished by the petitioner in W.P(C) 11317/2025 is
reproduced as under:-
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 9 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
30. The only reason for the rejection of the aforesaid certificate is the date
it bears, i.e., 21.04.2025. Importantly, it is conceded by the respondent no.1/
Union of India that if the same certificate had been obtained by the
petitioner a few weeks earlier, i.e., on or before 31.03.2025, the same would
have been acceptable to the respondents.
31. The petitioner (in W.P (C) 11317/2025), is correct in contending that
steps to obtain the requisite certificate could only be initiated after the
issuance of the scheme itself. The fortuitous circumstance of the certificate
bearing a particular date (in the absence of any in-principle objection as to
its veracity) cannot come in the way of the consideration of the said
certificate. In fact, it is the case of the respondents that, for the purposes of
the second round of the selection procedure, the very same certificate dated
21.04.2025 (in W.P (C) 11317/2025), would be deemed valid for
considering the petitioners’ application/candidature for grant of scholarship.
There is no reason why the said certificate should not suffice for the
selection round already concluded, especially since the petitioner holds a
valid offer from prestigious foreign universities, which will expire shortly.
32. Arbitrariness is inherent in the stand of the respondents that the
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 10 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
aforesaid income certificate dated 21.04.2025, furnished by the petitioner in
W.P.(C) 11317/2025, is acceptable for the upcoming second round of
selection but not for the concluded first round. Such a contention cannot be
accepted.
33. Apart from that during the course of the proceedings, the petitioner in
W.P (C) 11317/2025 has also brought on record income certificates dated
24.11.2020, 22.09.2021, 26.05.2022, 23.01.2023, and 20.03.2024, reflecting
the petitioner’s family income as ₹96,000, ₹96,000, ₹96,000, ₹1,50,000, and
₹2,10,000, respectively.
34. These certificates, read together with the income certificate dated
21.04.2025, unequivocally establish that the family income of the petitioners
is well below the prescribed threshold of ₹8,00,000. Thus, there is
substantive fulfilment of the income criteria under the scheme.
35. In W.P(C) 10312/2025, the position is even more stark. In the said
case, the petitioner has relied upon multiple income certificates, one of
which is dated 08.12.2023, i.e., pertaining to the relevant financial year for
which the income certificate is required. The various certificates issued in
favour of the petitioner therein is annexed as Annexure P–2 (Colly) to the
said writ petition.
36. It is particularly significant to note that the income certificate dated
08.12.2023 has a validity period of six months. Thus, it was valid till end of
the entire financial year 2023–2024. Thus, the petitioner substantially
complied with the requirement of furnishing an income certificate relatable
to the concerned financial year.
37. Again, there is no fundamental or in-principle objection regarding the
veracity of the certificates or as to whether the petitioner fulfills the income
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 11 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
criteria. The only ‘technical reason’ for the rejection of the petitioner’s
application was that the concerned certificate/s relied upon by the petitioner
did not bear a particular date. For the same reasons recorded in W.P.(C)
11317/2025, and in light of the fact that the certificate dated 08.12.2023 was
valid for six months, such a technical objection is wholly untenable and
cannot come in the way of the huge career opportunities presented to the
petitioners in the form of offers by the concerned universities.
38. The petitioners in W.P(C) 10312/2025 and W.P(C) 11317/2025 have
affirmed that, if the present petitions are allowed, they will forthwith accept
the offers by the concerned foreign universities and will not participate in
any further rounds of the selection procedure for the selection year 2025-26
or for subsequent years.
39. In the circumstances, since the rejection on the ground of the alleged
infirmity in the income certificate/s has been found to be untenable, the
present petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to immediately
process the grant of the requisite scholarship to the petitioners under the
National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme. The requisite formalities
shall be completed expeditiously so as to enable the petitioners to join the
concerned universities, i.e., the London School of Economics and Political
Science in the case of the petitioner in W.P(C) 11317/2025, and the
University of Glasgow in the case of the petitioner in W.P(C) 10312/2025,
prior to the deadline prescribed by the respective universities. The visa
formalities shall also be expedited in order to enable the petitioner to join
and report to the universities, within the time granted for the said purpose.
40. Having adverted to the controversy arising in the present petitions,
this Court is of the considered view that there is an urgent need to streamline
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 12 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14
the process relating to the requirement of income certificates under the
National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme. There is lack of clarity in the
existing procedure, which places undue hardship upon candidates who
otherwise fulfill the substantive eligibility criteria.
41. It is also imperative for the GNCTD to update its formats so that the
income certificates issued by it expressly reflect the financial year/ period to
which it pertains, rather than the same being a matter of inference.
42. The respondents, including the GNCTD, shall, accordingly, take
appropriate steps in this regard.
43. The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications
also stand disposed of.
SACHIN DATTA, J
SEPTEMBER 25, 2025/ uk/sv
W.P.(C) 10312/2025 & W.P.(C) 11317/2025 Page 13 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:CHINU LUTHRA
Signing Date:25.09.2025
16:55:14