ORDER

Leave granted.

1. The present appeal has become infructuous by reason of the seat that was reserved for the handicapped having already been given to respondent No. 5. In any case, the application that was made pertained to the previous year. However, Shri Colin Gonsalves, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, states that the impugned judgment dated 31.07.2019 will come in his way even if he has to apply afresh for the current year.

2. The impugned judgment has held against Shri Gonsalves's client-the appellant on two points, viz., that the bifurcation process under Section 34 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, would not apply, and that the aptitude test must be passed and cannot be exempted insofar as the appellant is concerned.

3. We are of the view that the High Court is correct on the bifurcation aspect. Further, insofar as the aptitude test having to be passed is concerned, the High Court is correct in saying that no exemption ought to be granted, but we follow the principle laid down in the Delhi High Court's judgment in Anamol Bhandari (Minor) through his father/Natural Guardian vs. Delhi Technological University 2012 (131) DRJ 583