Deletion of Suresh Danoda

Comment: People are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just for existing as civil servants in the government bureaucracy — but two of the four footnotes here are |primary source content on the government's own |self-published website about itself, which are not support for notability at all, and the two which are real media are just short blurbs about him announcing a government policy, not substantive coverage about him doing anything relevant to our notability criteria. The notability test for a Wikipedia article is being ''substantively'' the ''subject'' of a ''significant'' volume of press coverage, not just getting your name into the newspaper twice as a giver of soundbite in an article about something else
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:SELFPUB)

Comment: Per the nom's point, subjects whom have not been elected to a notable office do not normally meet 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: no evidence of passing  criteria
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)