Delhi Founder Nearly Rejected Candidate Over ‘Terrible’ English, Then Came a Surprising Twist

A Delhi founder sparked debate on workplace bias after sharing how he almost rejected a candidate for poor English. He hired the person based on exceptional technical skills, who then became his “best hire.” The story highlighted an issue in India where English fluency is often equated with competence, causing skilled individuals to be overlooked.

A Delhi-based founder has sparked a wider conversation about English fluency and workplace bias after sharing how he nearly rejected a candidate because of his “terrible” English, only to later describe him as his “best hire”.

Kanan Bahl, founder of Fingrowth Media, shared the experience in a post on X, reflecting on how English-speaking ability is often treated as a measure of intelligence and professional competence in India. The candidate, from a Tier-2 city, had struggled with English during the hiring process but delivered an outstanding performance on the sample assignment.

Check the viral post here: 

I interviewed a guy from a Tier-2 city whose English was terrible.

But he was too good with his sample task.

I was still overthinking about hiring him because his role involved facing the clients.

I still hired him!

I was tired of hiring people great with their English but…

— Kanan Bahl (@BahlKanan) August 19, 2026

Despite being impressed by the candidate’s technical abilities, Bahl initially hesitated because the position involved client interactions. He ultimately chose to look beyond language fluency and offered him the job.

The decision, he said, proved to be the right one.

Bahl explained that he had become frustrated with hiring people who could communicate impressively in English but were comparatively weak at the technical aspects of their roles. The candidate, whom he referred to as Kumar, eventually emerged as his “best hire”.

Rather than insisting that Kumar communicate with clients only in English, Bahl encouraged him to speak confidently in Hindi. He also cited the example of Kumar Vishwas, noting that the popular Hindi poet and speaker has built a huge audience without English being central to his credibility.

Drawing comparisons with countries including Japan, China and South Korea, Bahl argued that professionals in many parts of the world work successfully in their native languages. While acknowledging that English remains important in several professional environments, he questioned the tendency to treat fluency as proof of intelligence or capability.

His post triggered a strong discussion online. Several users argued that Indian workplaces often use English proficiency as a shortcut to judge polish, leadership potential and competence, potentially overlooking highly skilled candidates. Others said the story offered hope and highlighted the need for employers to assess people primarily on their ability to perform.

The debate has renewed an important question: should strong English be an advantage, or should it continue to influence who gets an opportunity in India’s workplaces?