Surender Singh v. All India Council for Technical Education Aicte

Delhi HC4 Feb 2026W.P.(C)/1254/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rounding off of marks 39.76% to 40%; AICTE degree validation; B.Tech (Civil) Engineering; parity with Manoj Kumar and Ors. v. AICT, W.P.(C) 9628/2019, order dated 03.08.2023; 39.05% also rounded off; consequential benefits; promotion under degree quota, post of Civil Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Haryana; certiorari against AICTE communication dated 15.1.2021; Article 226; writ of mandamus; High Court of Delhi; Jasmeet Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Direction to AICTE to grant the benefit of rounding off — petitioner's 39.76% marks rounded off to 40% — with all consequential benefits flowing; petition allowed and disposed of. ¶¶20

Surender Singh Vs All India Council for Technical… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1254/2026, CM APPL. 6215/2026 & CM APPL. 6216/2026 SURENDER SINGH .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Jasbir Singh Malik with Ms. Prachi Sohi, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION AICTE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anil Soni, Sr. Adv. and Ms. Pearl Sharma, Adv.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

04.02.2026

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking the following reliefs:-

¶12

“a. Issue an appropriate Writ including a Writ of mandamus directing the Respondent-AICTE for consideration the marks i.e. 39.76% obtained by the petitioner to be equivalent to 40% by applying the principle of rounding off for validation of petitioner’s degree as has been done in respect of similarly situated candidates those who obtained the marks in the range of 39.05% to 39.76%. b. Issue an appropriate Writ including a Writ of certiorari to quash the communication dated 15.1.2021 of the

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/02/2026 at 13:17:01

¶15

respondent-AICTE and grant all consequential benefits including the claim of the petitioner for the purpose of promotion under the degree quota for the post of Civil Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Govt, of Haryana by treating his degree in B.Tech (Civil) Engineering as valid degree from the date when it was awarded; and

¶16

c. Pass such further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶17

Mr. Malik, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that in similar circumstances wherein marks obtained by the students are more than 39%, have been rounded of to 40%.

¶18

Mr. Soni, learned senior counsel for AICT, affirms that the order passed in W.P.(C) 9628/2019 titled Manoj Kumar and Ors. v. AICT , the Hon’ble Court extended the benefit of rounding of the petitioners marks from 39.76 % to 40% and grant consequential benefits. In the same petition it was also mentioned that, 39.05% was also rounded of to 40 %.

¶19

Based on the parity and the order dated 03.08.2023, passed in WP(C) 9628/2019, it is directed that the AICTE shall grant the benefit of rounding of and the marks of the petitioner. Thus, 39.76 % shall be rounded off to 40%. Needless to state, all other consequential benefit shall flow.

¶20

The petition is allowed and disposed of.

¶21

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶22

FEBRUARY 4, 2026/NG

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/02/2026 at 13:17:01

Surender Singh v. All India Council for Technical Education Aicte

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surender Singh v. All India Council for Technical Education Aicte

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piraivanmathi P Vs Directorate of Education and Ors.

M/S Iifl Home Finance Ltd. Vs Sagar Aggarwal & Ors.

Dr Gitanjali Dey Vs Punjab National Bank through Branch Manager Vikas Puri

Amit Jain Vs General Manager Canara Bank & Ors.

Dr Bipin Batra Vs National Board of Examinations and Another

Resident Welfare Association Pocket- K and Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Santhi Caterers Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kartik Rana Vs Airport Authority of India

Dr Gitanjali Dey Vs Punjab National Bank through Branch Manager Vikas Puri

Raj Kumari Vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

Dr. Subhash Giri Vs Delhi Development Authority

Pankaj Kumar Vs Special Task Force and Others

Rathod Nidhi Kiran Vs National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences & Ors.

Ram Lal Arya Vs DDA