I probably just would have the made the headline clearer without changing the grammar. "Indian engineer named Suddam Hussain, denied 40 jobs due to name."
The slight change to deny makes it clear he is being refused work, rather than he is refusing work, and the bit at the end just clarifies the whole thing, although it isn't strictly necessary after the change to deny.
I probably just would have the made the headline clearer without changing the grammar. "Indian engineer named Suddam Hussain, _denied_ 40 jobs due to name."
The slight change to deny makes it clear he is being refused work, rather than he is refusing work, and the bit at the end just clarifies the whole thing, although it isn't strictly necessary after the change to deny.
Would you have prepended 40 with "for"?