Synopsis

The appellant, a person with benchmark disability (locomotor disability), applied for the post of Assistant Professor in Information Technology and Computer Science Engineering pursuant to two separate recruitment advertisements issued by the respondent university. He was not selected. In the first recruitment (2021), the Selection Committee recommended an unreserved candidate who scored 65.4% marks, while the appellant scored only 37.2%, below the 50% suitability threshold prescribed in the university’s internal recruitment document (approved by the Board of Management on 20th July 2021). In the second recruitment (2023), the appellant scored 38 marks (IT) and 37 marks (CSE), again below the 50% threshold, and the Selection Committee declared that no candidate was suitable. The appellant challenged his non‑selection, contending that the 50% suitability benchmark was not mentioned in the advertisements and was introduced after the recruitment process had started, violating the principle laid down in Tej Prakash Pathak v. High Court of Rajasthan (2025) 2 SCC 1 that “rules of the game cannot be changed once the game starts.” The Division Bench dismissed the appeals, holding that the 50% threshold was already in existence (approved on 20th July 2021, before the first advertisement of 10th September 2021). Its absence in the advertisement did not vitiate the selection process. The court also found no violation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, as the appellant was allowed to participate but failed to meet the prescribed suitability standards.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Hon’ble the Chief Justice and Justice Anish Dayal

Date of Judgment: 13th April 2026

Citation: 2026:DHC:3141-DB (LPA 256/2026 & LPA 258/2026)

Core Law: Service law – recruitment; Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016; Constitutional law – Articles 14, 16; Principles of natural justice

2. Legal Framework

Major laws and provisions involved

• Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – provisions for reservation and non‑discrimination

• Constitution of India – Articles 14 (equality), 16 (equality of opportunity in public employment)

• University statutes/regulations – recruitment document approved by Board of Management

Key legal principles applied

• “Rules of the game cannot be changed after the game starts” – principle from Tej Prakash Pathak: The Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench held that norms for eligibility and suitability cannot be altered once the recruitment process has commenced by issuance of an advertisement. However, this principle applies only when the change occurs after the advertisement. If the norms were alre

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.