Anmol Kumar Mishra (Minor) vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATEEK JALAN
Anmol Kumar Mishra (Minor) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Table of Content
1. petitioner's visual impairment and admission details. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments regarding validity of temporary disability certificates. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
3. court's analysis on the eligibility criteria for pwd admissions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. conclusion quashing the communication and allowing admission. (Para 17 , 18)

JUDGMENT

Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)--The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through hybrid mode [physical and virtual hearing].

1. Notice in the present petition was issued on 23.11.2021. Mr. Arjun Mitra, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3-Indian Institute of Technology ["IIT"], Kharagpur and Joint Seat Allocation Authority (JoSAA) 2021 respectively, has taken instructions and submits that no counter affidavit is required. The petition can, therefore, be decided on the documents on record, and is taken up for hearing with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks admission to IIT, Kharagpur for the Electronics and Electrical Communication Engineering Dual Degree (B.Tech. plus M.Tech.) course. He suffers from a condition of visual impairment called keratoconus, and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTPRATEEK JALANAnmol Kumar Mishra (Minor) – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATEEK JALAN
Anmol Kumar Mishra (Minor) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent