HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
SAMEER JAIN, J.
Raman Khandelawal, Son of Shri Anil Natani – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12414 of 2025 Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11604 of 2025
Decided On : 11-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to exclusion from pwd category in mbbs admissions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners' arguments against exclusion cite legal and procedural grounds. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. respondents defend their position based on guidelines and assessments. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. court evaluates procedural compliance of the respondents. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 5. judicial review limited to merits; emphasizes balance of inclusion and safety. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 6. court dismisses the writ petitions, upholding the assessment process. (Para 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. In the present batch of writ petitions, the scope of the controversy involved, albeit not limited to but is broadly and predominantly defined by the challenge raised regarding the arbitrary and illegal action of the respondents of not considering the candidature of the petitioners for professional course of MBBS, pursuant to NEET-UG Examination, 2025 albeit the petitioners stand high in order of merits; against the validity of provisional combined list (Counseling Round – I) dated 10.08.2025 for PWD candidates, wherein the petitioners have been excluded on the ground of their physical disability; as to the action of respondents of not following the guidelines spelled out in the ratio of Om Rathore vs. Director General of Health Service and Ors. by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and vis-à-vis the consequent guidelines issued by the National Medical Commission dated 19.07.2025 and 21.07.2025. Consequently, considering the fact that the writ petitions warrant adjudication on common questions of law and fact; with the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the parties, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12414/2025 titled as Raman Khandelawal Son of Shri Anil Natani Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. is being taken up as the lead case. It is cautiously clarified that any discrepancies in the present batch of writ petitions, pertain purely to the factual narratives contained therein and not vis-à-vis the questions of law to be determined by this Court; the instant judgment shall be applicable on the petition connected herein/henceforth on mutatis mutandis basis.
2. The lead petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"i. By appropriate writ, order or direction the action of the respondents of not considering the candidature of petitioner for admission into Medical Course under PwD Category, pursuant to NEET UG-2025 may be declared as illegal, arbitrary and against the spirit of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
ii. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the provisional merit list dated 10.08.2025 may be quashed and set aside and Respondents may be directed to prepare fresh merit list for admission in Medical Course pursuant to NEET UG-2025, while including the name of the Petitioner and accordingly, Petitioner may be considered for admission in consonance with his merit and preference, for admission to Medical Course.
iii. Any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the Petitioner."
SUBMISSIONS BY LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS:
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset contended that the petitioners have been unjustly denied consideration for admission to the MBBS course under the NEET UG–2025 examination in the category of Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PWD). It is submitted that despite securing a meritorious ranks and marks in the said category, the petitioner’s candidature has been arbitrarily excluded from the merit list dated 10.08.2025, which is under challenge in the present proceedings to the extent of such exclusion.
4. It is further submitted that, as per the details reflected in the NEET UG–2025 online application form (Annexure-2 in lead petition), the petitioners secured 420 and 500 marks respectively and stood meritorious und
Omkar Ramchandra Gond vs. Union of India & Ors.
Kabir Paharia vs. National Medical Commission & Ors.
Om Rathod vs. The Director General of Health Services & Ors.
The court upheld the exclusion of candidates with disabilities from medical admissions based on a lawful assessment of functional eligibility, balancing inclusion with patient safety under the Rights....
Exclusion from admission despite valid disability certification violates rights and mandates of reasonable accommodation under disability laws.
The quantified disability alone cannot disqualify a candidate from medical admission; functional assessment and reasonable accommodations are essential for eligibility under the Rights of Persons wit....
Quantified disability alone cannot disqualify candidates from educational opportunities; individual assessments must determine eligibility based on the ability to pursue the course.
The court emphasized that eligibility for medical courses must be based on functional assessments rather than mere disability quantification, reinforcing the principle of reasonable accommodation for....
Reasonable accommodation is a fundamental right for persons with disabilities, and Disability Assessment Boards must prioritize functional competence over mere quantification to ensure equality and i....
The right to reasonable accommodation for PwBD candidates in educational admissions is fundamental; systemic discrimination based on disabilities violates constitutional equal rights.
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 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.
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.