High Court of Delhi (Anil Kshetarpal & Amit Mahajan, JJ.; judgment authored by Amit Mahajan, J.), pronounced 02.05.2026 — W.P.(C) 17736/2025 & CM APPL. 73299/2025 and W.P.(C) 3642/2026 & CM APPL. 17769/2026, Deepak Kumar & Ors. v. Border Security Force & Anr. — Recruitment to the post of Constable (GD), sports quota 2025, BSF, per advertisements dated 10.10.2025 and 19.12.2025 — Petitioners, junior-level sportspersons, were not issued admit cards as their certificates, issued by 'FIT INDIA Youth Games Development Federation–Goa' and 'National Sports Federation of India', did not conform to the advertised criterion that the games be conducted by a Sports Association/Federation duly affiliated/recognised by the Indian Olympic Association or by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports as a National Sports Federation — On the Court's direction of 21.11.2025, verification letters dated 10.12.2025 drew replies dated 11.12.2025 and 10.12.2025 confirming absence of recognition/affiliation, NSFI adding that it does not endorse use of its certificates where Government recognised sports are mandatory — Petitioners' principal plank was parity: similarly situated candidates with similar certificates were allegedly shortlisted and appointed in the previous cycle, making their exclusion violative of Article 14 — Held: Article 14 cannot be invoked to perpetuate an irregularity; a benefit erroneously conferred confers no right; equality does not multiply errors; even if deficient candidates were earlier appointed, such appointments contrary to the advertisement would be improper; parity cannot be extended for an alleged irregular benefit — Respondents (learned CGSC) stated they are examining the veracity of previous-cycle appointments and assured appropriate action in accordance with law — Both writ petitions dismissed as devoid of merit; pending applications disposed of; copy of the order to be kept in the connected matter. (Interim history: participation permitted by order dated 24.11.2025; vide order dated 08.04.2026, 03 of 05 Petitioners in W.P.(C) 17736/2025 qualified and the petition became infructuous for the remaining 02.)