The court declared the blanket ban on migration for medical students with disabilities unreasonable and unconstitutional, emphasizing the individual's rights under the PwD Act, thus mandating reasonable accommodations.

JUDGMENT :

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, C.J.

PRELUDE

1. Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter referred to as ‘PwD’) have historically faced marginalisation and exclusion, and have often been denied their fundamental rights and dignity. Despite laws and Government policies aimed at promoting inclusivity and reasonable accommodation being in place, many continue to experience social, economic and cultural barriers that hinder their full participation and growth in the society. Denial of rights and reasonable accommodation for PwD not only affect individuals but also undermines the principles of equality and justice.

1.1 Facts of this case depict as to how the petitioner, who is a person suffering with 40% disability of vision impairment, has been denied his right to reasonable accommodation by the respondent on the basis of a Regulation that puts a blanket ban on a student pursuing under graduate course in Medicine to seek migration from one medical college to the other even though, he may be most deserving to seek such migration.

FACTS

2. The petitioner suffers from low vision/ blindness, and his disability has been assessed at 40% by the competent authority, namely, the Chief Medical Officer, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. He took National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test – UG – 2023 (NEET–2023) and was successful in the said examination in the category of Other Backward Class – PwD, however, when the counselling on the basis of NEET–2023 started, he was not permitted to participate in the counselling in this category which compelled him to institute W.P.(C) 782/2023 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court that was allowed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by means of an order dated 22.09.2023 whereby, a direction was issued to the respondent no.1– National Medical Commission (a statutory body constituted under Section 3 of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NMC Act, 2019’) to ensure that counselling authorities are appropriately instructed to treat the petitioner as a person with disability and consider his application for admission in accordance with other parameters as a person with disability. The operative portion of the said order dated 22.09.2023, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in respect of the petition filed by the petitioner is extracted herein below:

“ORDER

W.P.(C) No. 788/2023 & W.P.(C) No. 782/2023:-

1. The Reports in respect of the petitioners, i.e., Rohit Kumar Singh (in Writ Petition (C) No.788/2023) and Sahil Arsh (Writ Petition (C) No.782/2023) issued by the Medical Board constituted by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi both dated 02-09-2023, have upheld their claim for treated as persons with disability. It was argued on behalf of the respondents that lack of clarity in regard to the certificate or evaluation of Sahil Arsh should be taken into account and further clarification may be sought. This Court is of the opinion that no such further clarification is necessary having regard to the range indicated by the Expert Board or Committee.

2. Having regard to these facts, both the petitioners’ claim to be treated as persons with disabilities in Writ Petition (C) No.788/2023 (Rohit Kumar Singh vs. Union of India & Ors.) and Writ Petition(C) No.782/2023 (Sahil Arsh vs. Union of India & Ors.) are upheld. A direction is issued to the respondents to ensure that the counseling authorities are appropriately instructed to