Back
State of Kerala – Appellant
Versus
Adwaitha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
T.R. Ravi, J.
These appeals have been preferred against the common judgment in W.P.(C) No.29803 of 2024 and connected cases. The issue relates to the admission to the Medical and Allied courses for which a reservation is provided for persons with disabilities. Section 32 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short ‘the Act’) provides for reservation in higher educational institutions and it says that all Government institutions of higher education and other higher education institutions receiving aid from the Government shall reserve not less than five per cent seats for persons with benchmark disabilities. Section 2(r) of the Act defines “person with benchmark disabilities” as a person with not less than forty per cent of a specified disability where specified disability has not been defined in measurable terms and includes a person with disability where specified disability has been defined in measurable terms, as certified by the certifying authority. The “certifying authority” as per Section 2(e) means an authority designated under Section 57(1) of the Act. Section 57(1) says that the appropriate Government shall designate persons, having requisite qualificat
The 2016 Act's provisions for certifying disabilities take precedence over extra statutory assessments, ensuring that admissions are based on valid certifications.
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....
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 affirmed that the UDID must be prioritized for disability claims over conflicting assessments, reinforcing the legal right to reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities.
The Appellate Medical Board's assessment should be given sanctity, and challenges to the constitution of the Special Medical Board should be raised in the writ petition. The State has a duty to make ....
Courts cannot interfere with the reports given by competent medical boards in the absence of malafides, and they do not hold expertise on the subject of medical assessments.
Quantified disability alone cannot disqualify candidates from educational opportunities; individual assessments must determine eligibility based on the ability to pursue the course.
The Disability Assessment Board cannot reassess benchmark disability levels set by authorized agencies, focusing instead on functional competency for medical course eligibility, aligning with the Rig....
Proper examination and adherence to guidelines for granting disability certificates are crucial, especially in the context of admission to medical courses.
The court prioritizes functional competency over rigid disability percentages in educational admissions for disabled candidates.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
