Back
2025 Supreme(P&H) 251
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SHEEL NAGU, CJ, SUDHIR SINGH, J.
Sushank – Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
CWP Nos. 33097, 33520 of 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025
For the Appellant : Siddharth Gupta
For the Respondents: Anil Chawla, Salil Sabhlok, Ravi Sharma, Aditya Grover, Harmanjot Singh Gill, Nitin Kaushal, Aman Bahri, Himanshu Arora
Disability qualifications should not disqualify candidates for medical course admissions if assessed fit, aligning with recent Supreme Court rulings.
Headnote:(A) Disability Rights - Education - Medical Examination Certificate - CWP Nos. 33097, 33520 of 2024 - Petitioners challenged their medical fitness certificates denying admission to respective medical courses - Recent Supreme Court ruling clarified that quantified disability should not disqualify candidates with benchmark disabilities for admissions if assessed fit by a Disability Assessment Board - Court directed that they be admitted to their respective courses due to favorable medical opinions despite previous certifications. (Paras 3, 7, 8)
(B) Judicial Review - The absence of an Appellate Body for disability assessments necessitates judicial intervention. (Paras 4, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners were denied admission to medical courses based on medical examination results stating they were ‘unfit.’ Following a Supreme Court ruling, the court intervened to reassess based on a constituted Medical Board’s evaluations, which ultimately found them fit. (Paras 2, 6)
Findings of Court:
The court accepted the medical opinions affirming the petitioners' fitness to pursue their medical programs, mandating their admission. (Paras 7, 8)
Issues: Whether quantified disabilities disqualify candidates from admission despite being assessed fit. Framework for reviewing disability assessment decisions. (Paras 3, 4)
Ratio Decidendi: The ruling emphasized the importance of independent assessments by Disability Assessment Boards, stating that candidates should be admitted unless substantial limitations in their disabilities hinder their course capabilities. (Paras 3, 7)
Result: Petitions allowed, with instructions for immediate admissions to mandated programs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenges regarding medical fitness and admission. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. apex court's directive on disability and educational admissions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. medical board findings on petitioners' fitness. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's order granting admission based on medical opinions. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
SHEEL NAGU, CJ.
1. This order shall dispose of CWP-33097-2024, titled Dr. Sushank Vs. Union of India and others and CWP-33520-2024, titled Dr. Chandanpreet Kamboj Vs. State of Punjab and others .
2. In CWP-33097-2024, the petitioner is aggrieved by Medical Examination Certificate dated 27/28.11.2024 (Annexure P-14), by which he has been declared ‘unfit’ by the Medical Board for admission to M.S. General Surgery, a course to be pursued by the petitioner in Pandit Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak (respondent No.5), while in CWP-33520-2024, challenge is to Certificate of Disability for NEET admissions dated 23.09.2024 (Annexure P-12), whereby the petitioner has been declared ‘not eligible’ to pursue MD MS Radio Diagnosis course, to be pursued by him in Government Medical College, Patiala (respondent No.6).
3. This Court, while taking cognizance, was apprised of recent decision of the Apex Court rendered in Omkar Ramchandra Gond Vs. The Union of India and others , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2860 (Civil Appeal No. 10611 of 2011 decided on 15.10.2024), which inter alia in paragraphs 53 concluded thus :
“53. For the reasons set out hereinabove:
(i) We hold that quantified disability per se will not disentitle a candidate with benchmark disability from being considered for admission to educational institutions. The candidate will be eligible, if the Disability Assessment Board opines that notwithstanding the quantified disability the candidate can pursue the course in question. The NMC regulations in the notification of 13.05.2019 read with the Appendix H-1 should, pending the re- formulation by NMC, be read in the light of the holdings in this judgment.
(ii) The Disability Assessment Boards assessing the candidates should positively record whether the disability of the candidate will or will not come in the way of the candidate pursuing the course in question. The Disability Assessment Boards should state reasons in the event of the Disability Assessment Boards concluding that the candidate is not eligible for pursuing the course.
(iii) The Disability Assessment Boards will, pending formulation of appropriate regulations by the NMC, pursuant to the communication of 25.01.2024 by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, keep in mind the salutary points mentioned in the said communication while forming their opinion.
(iv) Pending creation of the appellate body, we further direct that such decisions of the Disability Assessment Boards which give a negative opinion for the candidate will be amenable to challenge in judicial review proceedings. The Court seized of the matter in the judicial review proceedings shall refer the case of the candidate to any premier medical institute having the facility, for an independent opinion and relief to the candidate will be granted or denied based on the opinion of the said medical institution to which the High Court had referred the matter.
(v) We have already, pursuant to our order dated 18.09.2024, in view of the favorable report dated 13.09.2024 of the Maulana Azad Medical College, granted admission to the appellant. We confirm the admission and direct the concerned authorities to treat the admission as a valid admission in the eye of law.”
4. In view of directions issued by the Apex Court in paragraph 53 of the judgment in Omkar Ramchandra Gond’s case (supra), wherein the admitted factual scenario is of absence of any Appellate Body for reviewing the decision of the Medical Board, this Court vide order dated 12.12.2024 directed the Medical Superintendent, PGIMER, Chandigarh, to constitute a Board of Doctors to give opinion as regards physical fitness of
