Safiya Malik

The Delhi High Court has upheld the decision to cancel a candidate’s application for the SSC(T)-63 (Oct 2024) Course due to incorrect degree nomenclature in the application. The court observed that the petitioner had misrepresented his educational qualification and that the respondents were justified in rejecting the application as per the terms of the selection notification.

The petitioner applied for the SSC(T)-63 (Oct 2024) Course under the Computer Science Engineering stream and secured an All-India Rank of 18 in the merit list published on November 24, 2023. However, his candidature was later canceled based on the scrutiny of his educational documents, which revealed that he had a Master of Science in Data Science instead of the required M.Sc. in Computer Science.

The cancellation letter dated August 16, 2024, stated:

“You have selected 'M.Sc Computer Science' stream in your online application. However, during scrutiny of your educational documents, it is found that you have studied Engineering Degree in 'Master of Science in Data Science' which is not enlisted in Para-3 of SSC(T)-63 (Oct 2024) course notification. In view of the above, as per Para 3 and Note 1 under Para 15 of SSC(T)-63 (Oct 2024) course notification, your candidature for SSC(T)-63 (Oct 2024) course is hereby cancelled due to non-fulfilment of eligibility educational (stream) criteria as per Para 3 of course notification and for submission of incorrect information in online application.”

The petitioner argued that his M.Sc. in Data Science degree was equivalent to an M.Sc. in Computer Science and that he had previously been asked to obtain an equivalence certificate from his university for the TGC-138 (Jan 2024) Course. He obtained a certificate from NSHM College of Management & Technology, Kolkata, confirming that his degree was equivalent to an M.Sc. in Computer Science. The petitioner contended that the respondents should have considered this equivalence certificate before canceling his candidature.

The petitioner further relied on:

• The AICTE Addendum Notification dated October 6, 2021, which states that recruitment organizations should evaluate candidates' suitability through an expert committee when a degree’s equivalence is in question.

• The UGC Public Notice on Equivalence of Degrees issued on July 19, 2016, which states that equivalence of degrees should be determined by the concerned university and, in cases of employment, by the employer.

• The AICTE Notification dated April 28, 2017, which lists Data Science as a recognized discipline under Computer Science and Engineering.

The respondents countered that:

• The petitioner had falsely declared his degree as M.Sc. in Computer Science, while in reality, he held an M.Sc. in Data Science.

• Clause 3 of the notification explicitly stated that only the specified engineering streams and their acceptable equivalent streams would be accepted. Any variation in the nomenclature of the degree would result in cancellation.

• The notification did not permit the evaluation of degrees not listed as equivalent, and the petitioner’s M.Sc. in Data Science was not explicitly recognized as equivalent to M.Sc. in Computer Science in the course notification.

The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur, reviewed the notification and upheld the respondents’ stance that the selection process only permitted degrees explicitly listed in the notification. The court observed:

“Candidates must note that only the Engineering streams and their acceptable equivalent streams, strictly as notified in the table below, will be accepted. Candidates with degrees in any other Engineering stream(s) are not eligible to apply. Any variation between the nomenclature of Engineering stream as given on the degree parchment/marksheet and that submitted by the candidate in his/her online application will result in cancellation of candidature.”

The court further stated that the respondents had no obligation to evaluate degrees that were not explicitly recognized as equivalent in the notification. It held that the selection process had clearly stated that equivalence would not be determined beyond the provided list.

Regarding the petitioner’s reliance on past selection processes where equivalence certificates were requested, the court noted that each selection process is governed by its own notification. It stated:

“The present selection process, having stated that exercise of determining equivalence shall not be undertaken, no fault can be attributed to the respondents for not placing any reliance on the equivalence certificate produced by the petitioner with respect to the earlier selection process.”

The court also relied on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Shifana P.S. v. State of Kerala & Ors., which held that equivalence of qualifications is a matter for the employer or recruiting authority to decide and not for the courts to determine in judicial review. The judgment stated:

“The respondents have set out the degrees that shall be considered equivalent to the Core Engineering stream and have further warned candidates that any variation between the nomenclature of Engineering stream as given on the degree parchment/marksheet and that submitted by the candidate in his/her online application will result in cancellation of candidature.”

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the cancellation of the petitioner’s candidature, concluding:

“By filing up his degree as M.Sc. Computer Science instead of M.Sc. Data Science, which the petitioner actually possesses, the petitioner has attracted the wrath of Note 1 of the Notification/Advertisement. The decision of the respondent to reject the application of the petitioner for mis-statement, therefore, cannot be faulted.”

Case Title: Ankit Kumar Tiwari v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 11983/2024
Bench: Justice Navin Chawla, Justice Shalinder Kaur

[Read/Download order]