New Delhi- In a significant judgment that prioritizes substance over form, the Delhi High Court has come to the rescue of two meritorious Dalit students, enabling their dreams of studying at prestigious foreign universities to become a reality. Despite securing prestigious offers, Vishal from the London School of Economics and Manish from the University of Glasgow, their National Overseas Scholarship applications were rejected solely because their income certificates did not explicitly mention the required financial year.

The court slammed the Union Government's "hyper-technical" rejection of their National Overseas Scholarship applications based on the date of their income certificates, stating that such an approach frustrates the constitutional mandate to promote the educational interests of weaker sections.

The National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme, a flagship programme of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, was created to support students from Scheduled Castes, Denotified Tribes, landless labourers, and marginalized groups in pursuing higher studies abroad. The scheme is meant to open doors of opportunity to those who have historically been denied access.

In 2025, 125 students were shortlisted, but only 40 were initially issued provisional award letters. The remaining 66 were left in limbo, with the Ministry citing “procedural approvals” despite budgetary funds being available. Advocate Sushant Inderjeet Singh appeared for petitioner Laxmi Dhire, who had been unjustly waitlisted despite fulfilling all criteria. He argued that the denial of award letters was unlawful and discriminatory and he argued in Delhi High Court that Department should be issuance of letters to all 66 candidates.

Sharing full details with The Mooknayak, Advocate Sushant Singh stated, "Beyond this, four other scholars, Dhiraj (University of Singapore), Sagar Morle (PhD, University of Sussex), Vishal (M.Sc. Economics, London School of Economics), and Manish (M.Sc. Computer Science, University of Glasgow), faced outright rejection on hyper-technical grounds such as income certificates not mentioning the financial year, even when issued by government authorities. In each case, the Delhi High Court found the rejection arbitrary and untenable, directed the Government to process their scholarships, and ensured that they could join their world-class universities in time."

The present case

The latest case involved Vishal Kumar and Manish Kumar.

Vishal secured an unconditional offer to pursue an MSc in Economics at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Manish received an unconditional offer for an MSc in Computer Science at the University of Glasgow.

Both students, having met all eligibility criteria, including age, caste, academic merit, and family income (well below the ₹8 lakh threshold), applied for financial aid under the National Overseas Scholarship (NOS) Scheme for 2025-26, administered by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment.

However, when the selection list was declared on July 1, 2025, their names were on the rejected list. The reason cited against both was: "Income Certificate of valid FY not furnished."

The Government's "Technical" Stand

The Ministry argued that the scheme's guidelines mandated the submission of an income certificate for the financial year 2023-24.

In Vishal's case, his certificate was dated April 21, 2025. The Ministry contended that since it was issued after March 31, 2025, it was assumed to pertain to the financial year 2024-25.

For Manish, his certificate was dated December 8, 2023. The Ministry argued that as it was issued after March 31, 2023, it was considered for the financial year 2022-23.

The government maintained that strict adherence to the rules was necessary for a competitive scheme to ensure a level playing field for all applicants.

The Court's Resounding Rejection of "Hyper-Technicality"

A bench of Justice Sachin Datta dismantled the government's arguments, delivering a powerful judgment in favour of the students. The court acknowledged that the income certificates issued by the Delhi government follow a specific format, valid for six months and without an explicit mention of the financial year, a matter over which the students had no control.

 The court observed that the veracity of the certificates was never in doubt and that the students' family income was substantively well below the prescribed limit. It held that "a minor technicality is jeopardising a once-in-a-lifetime academic opportunity for the petitioners despite their merit."

The court exposed a major contradiction in the Ministry's stance. It noted that the same income certificate (dated April 21, 2025) submitted by Vishal Kumar was deemed acceptable for the next round of selection but not for the concluded one. The court found this "inherent arbitrariness" unacceptable.

The judgment emphasized that the state has a constitutional obligation under Article 46 to promote the educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes. The purpose of a welfare scheme like the NOS is to facilitate this, not to create hurdles based on technicalities.

Following the court's order, the Ministry has been directed to immediately process and grant the NOS scholarship to both students. The authorities have been instructed to complete all formalities expeditiously so that Vishal and Manish can join their respective universities before their admission deadlines expire.

The court also directed 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.

With these victories, five cases have now been won in the Delhi High Court, restoring not only scholarships but the constitutional promise of equality and dignity.

"The plight of these scholars mirrors the story of Eklavya in the Mahabharata, a gifted disciple denied his rightful path and asked to surrender his thumb. Today, Dalit and marginalized students are forced to cut off their opportunities through bureaucratic hurdles and silence. The NOS scheme, instead of being a ladder of justice, has too often become another site of denial," Advocate Singh said.

He further added, " I am thankful to the Delhi High Court for upholding justice and ensuring that talent is not wasted. But the larger question remains: why must students litigate to claim what is already theirs? The State must ensure that no Modern Eklavya is ever again made to sacrifice his future at the altar of red tape. Instead of cutting their thumbs, we must place pens, research, and opportunities in their hands — for that is how India’s future will be written."

This ruling not only unlocks a world of opportunity for deserving students but also sets a crucial precedent, compelling government authorities to adopt a more compassionate and purpose-oriented interpretation of rules, ensuring that welfare schemes truly serve their intended beneficiaries.