Delhi HC: Eligible Meritorious Candidates Scholarship Available If ITR Filed

The Delhi high court sees that the only mistake to furnish the ITR certificate rather than the income certificate could not be directed to the condition in which a qualified candidate would be unable to get the scholarship when the 2 documents confirm the “same parameters of income requirements”.

Justice Prathiba M Singh mentioned during supervising the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to provide a scholarship to a law student that belongs to the SC category under the “Central Sector Scholarship Scheme of Top Class Education for SC Students” in 8 weeks.

The applicant is a student of Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law who has furnished the application dated November 14, 2020, along with his father’s income tax return to claim the scholarship in his first year. On 23rd September the ministry rejected the application on verification as per the invalid ITR certificate. Under the ministry, the applicant has been unable to furnish the income certificate and would have furnished the income tax return.

On email rejection, the applicant provides the income certificate for processing his application. The ministry mentioned that the scholarship was processed.

On the date 9th Nov 2021 post some reminders the ministry supports, the revision of the documents is not permissible since the same amends the merit list. Therefore the scholarship application was denied.

For the second year, the law student would again be applied for the scholarship. But he was not allotted a scholarship even when his candidature would reveal to be qualified.

Analyzing the scheme in question, Justice Singh elaborated that its purpose and intention would be to authorize the students of scheduled caste and scheduled tribes for claiming high-class education possibilities.

“The eligibility of the present candidate i.e., the Petitioner is not in doubt as is evident from the recommendation of the University that has been placed on record, as also from the income tax returns and the Income Certificate,” the court articulated.

The applicant is found to be accredited by the university and comes in the merit list, both in the first and second year, the court specified that

“Considering these facts and submissions, in the opinion of this Court, a mere discrepancy in filing the Income Tax Return instead of the Income Certificate, despite the two documents evidencing the same parameters of income requirements, cannot lead to a situation where an eligible meritorious candidate is deprived of the scholarship.”

Analyzing the income tax return and calculating the total income the court mentioned that the documents specified that law students of law would meet the eligibility for income tax return filing criteria and that the income shown in both documents would be identical.

“A hyper-technical approach obviously ought not to be taken in this matter. The Petitioner has also been diligent in replying, to the discrepancies being pointed out by the Respondent. Thus, the Ministry ought to have considered the Petitioner’s candidature and ought not to have rejected the Petitioner’s application,” the court articulated.