The judgment emphasizes the need for policy amendments to allow allocation of unfilled seats for persons with benchmark disabilities to those with disabilities, ensuring compliance with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

JUDGMENT

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ

1. The proceedings of this petition have been instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, initially praying for issuing a direction to the respondent no.1/Union of India and respondent no.2/National Medical Commission to allocate a seat to the petitioner against one of the vacancies under Persons with Disabilities [hereinafter referred as „PwD‟] category in NEET-UG 2022 cycle as per the procedure and in terms of the provisions prescribed under Section 32 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 [hereinafter referred as „the RPwD Act‟];

An alternate prayer was also made to issue a direction for a fresh medical examination with the fresh medical board at All India Institute of Medical Sciences for assessment of the extent of disability of the petitioner;

The petitioner also prayed that Section 32 (1) of the RPwD Act, read with Note 3 of the amendment dated 14.05.2019, be declared as unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India insofar as they restrict the benefit of reservation in government institutions of higher education and other higher education institutions receiving aid from government, for persons with benchmark disabilities alone;

The petitioner has further prayed for taking an expeditious decision on the representation dated 05.01.2023 preferred by him in a time-bound manner.

A prayer for payment of compensation to the petitioner has also been made.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Sh. Rahul Bajaj, learned counsel for the petitioner, has stated that the petitioner does not press the prayer seeking a declaration of Section 32 (1) of the RPwD Act as unconstitutional. He has stated that the other prayers made in the writ petition have lost their efficacy, except for the issues raised by the petitioner in his representation dated 05.01.2023.

4. Our attention has also been drawn to an order passed by this Court in this case on 13.04.2023, wherein it has been observed by the Court that the petition involves an important aspect in respect of filling up of the seats under PwD category and in case candidates with prescribed benchmark disability are not available under PwD category, the seats are being diverted to the open category/respective categories. The order dated 13.04.2023 passed by the Court is extracted herein below:

“It has been brought to the notice of this Court by learned Counsel for Union of India that the representation of the Petitioner has been rejected.

The petition involves a very important aspect in respect of filling up of seats under the PwD category and, in case, candidates with prescribed benchmark are not available under the PwD category, the seats are being diverted to General Category/ respective category.

A detailed and exhaustive reply is also necessary by Union of India. Let the same be filed positively within 6 weeks.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has requested this Court that the documents which are filed be furnished to him in Word Format. The prayer made is a genuine prayer and the learned Counsel for the Respondents while filing the reply/ counter affidavit shall serve a copy to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner in Word Format.

The delay in filing the reply on behalf of National Medical Commission stands condoned. The reply is taken on record.

List on 17.07.2023.”

5. It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the represent