IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
GOUTAM BHADURI, N.K. CHANDRAVANSHI, JJ.
Anjali Sonkar D/o Shri Rambhagat Sonkar – Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WP (C) No. 4849 of 2022
Decided On : 19-12-2022
Chhattisgarh Chikitsa, Dant Chikitsa Evam Bhowtik Chikitsa (Physiotherapy) Snatak Pravesh Niyam, 2018 - Rule 5(2)(b), (i), (v), 7 (iii) - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Section 2(q)(r)(s)(t) and (zc) - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 - Rule 18, (1), 5 - Admission - Seeking Admission under PWD - Student who appeared in NEET-2022 has sought for seeking admission under PWD (Person with Disability) Quota which was disallowed by State – Held, Supreme Court in Vikash Kumar (supra) observed that as a social construct, disability encompasses features broader and more comprehensive than a medical condition - In instant case, disability was proved by State Medical Board which acknowledged disability - Principle of reasonable accommodation is required to be applied for facilitating development of disabled - Rules 5(2)(b)(i) named Chhattisgarh Chikitsa, Dant Chikitsa Evam Bhowtik Chikitsa (Physiotherapy) Snatak Pravesh Niyam, 2018 where disqualifies a person with disability on upper arm is declared as ultra-vires to the notification of Central Government - Petitioner having submitted original medical certificate which is required, it cannot be stated that certificate was produced after prescribed date – Court set aside order of counseling committee (Annexure P-1), whereby candidature of petitioner was cancelled and direct that case of the petitioner for her admission to M.B.B.S. Course under PWD Category be considered as against one seat in Unreserved category which was directed to be reserved by this Court vide order – Petition allowed.
ORDER :
1. The student who appeared in NEET-2022 has sought for seeking admission under the PWD (Person with Disability) Quota which was disallowed by the State.
2. Today the case was assigned by Hon'ble the Chief Justice and since the winter holidays are intervening and the urgency was projected, the case was heard finally today itself, as the counseling process would be closing on 21.12.2022.
3. The petitioner claims that she possessed the certificate of disability issued by the District Medical Board, Rajnandgaon. The petitioner seeks M.B.B.S. admission in the Government Medical College, Mahasamund, C.G. under the PWD category. Along with writ has been sought that Rule 5(2)(b) of the Chhattisgarh Chikitsa, Dant Chikitsa Evam Bhowtik Chikitsa (Physiotherapy) Snatak Pravesh Niyam, 2018 (in short ‘the Rules 2018’) which was published in the State Government Gazette dated 25.05.2018 be declared as ultra-vires to the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short ‘the Act 2016’) further relief is also sought that the certificate of disability issued by the District Medical Board, Rajnandgaon, under Rule 18 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 (for short ‘the Rules 2017’) be declared as valid and legal; the petitioner also sought that the notification dated 13.05.2019 issued by the Government of India be declared as unconstitutional and ultra-vires to the provisions of the Act, 2016. The petitioner further seeks quashment of the order dated 08.12.2022 passed by the State Medical Board.
4. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner appeared in the NEET examination on 17.07.2022. In the year 2013 the petitioner met with an electric shock wherein her middle finger of right hand got damaged hence she sustained 40% disability. On 07.09.2022 the results of the NEET was declared. In the month of October, 2022 the petitioner, who belongs to O.B.C. category, filled up Online application form mentioning her college choice under the PWD category with a certificate issued by the team of doctors of District Medical Board, Rajnandgaon dated 27.12.2019. According to the petitioner the said disability certificate of 40% was duly annexed along with the documents. Thereafter, she was qualified under the OBC-NCL category. She further was entitled to be considered in hold of PWD certificate issued by the District Medical Board, Rajnandgaon, however, during the process of counseling her candidature was rejected on the following grounds:
(ii) The disability certificate produced by candidate is not issued by State Medical Board as per the Annexure-4 of the above mentioned Gazette notification No. F-21-02/2018/09/55-4 dated 25.05.2018.
5. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the certificate was initially issued under Form-V appended to Rule 18 (1) of the Rules, 2017, therefore, the same was in pursuance of the Act, 2016. It is stated that in such certificate the petitioner was shown with 40% permanent locomotor disability. It is stated that the said certificate was not accepted for the reason that it is not issued by the State Medical Board, as the format appended to the Rules, 2018 speaks about production of certificate by the State Medical Board. He would submit that the said Rules, 2018, therefore, is ultra-vires to the Act, 2016. He would further submit that Rule 5 speaks that before counseling, three months old certificate would not be considered but that issue has now been settled by order dated 05.12.2022 and thereafter on 15.12.2022, wherein the petitioner was asked to appear before th
Dolly Chhanda vs. Chairman, JEE
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of meeting the eligibility criteria, including the condition of both hands being intact with intact sensation, sufficient strength, ....
The court upheld the validity of amended eligibility regulations for medical admissions requiring intact limbs and functional competency, emphasizing adherence to application timelines as lawful and ....
Exclusion from admission despite valid disability certification violates rights and mandates of reasonable accommodation under disability laws.
Proper examination and adherence to guidelines for granting disability certificates are crucial, especially in the context of admission to medical courses.
Denial of admission to a person with disability in educational institutions, especially against the quota earmarked for persons with disability, shall be considered based on the candidate's ability t....
The court emphasized the need for literal interpretation of statutory provisions and the limited scope of judicial interference in policy decisions made by expert bodies.
Disability quantification should not disqualify candidates from medical education; functional competency must be assessed for eligibility.
The assessment of disabilities under statutory guidelines by competent authorities must be prioritized over any subsequent assessments made by non-statutory boards for admission to medical courses.
The court established that valid certifications under the RPwD Act must be recognized for admission to medical courses, emphasizing the authority of designated certifying bodies over assessments by o....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.