$~1 and 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9074/2025, CM APPL. 38607/2025, CM APPL.

45937/2025 and CM APPL. 45969/2025 JERRY LALHRATTHANG BUONGPUI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raja Choudhary, Ms. Anushika Mishra, Mr.Dhruv Tiwari and Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb (CGSC) with Mr. Muhammad Aamir Khan Advocate.

Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Mr. Manish Kumar Singh, Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advocates for UPSC Mr. Puneet Yadav SPC With Vivek Nagar GP

2 + W.P.(C) 10105/2025, CM APPL. 42109/2025 and CM APPL.

45893/2025 NISA UNNIRAJAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raja Choudhary, Ms. Anushika Mishra, Mr.Dhruv Tiwari and Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb (CGSC) with Mr. Muhammad Aamir Khan Advocate.

Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Mr. Manish Kumar Singh, Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advocates for UPSC Mr.Puneet Yadav SPC With Vivek Nagar GP CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R

% 24.02.2026

1. The Court vide order dated 06.08.2025 has considered the background under which the petitioners have approached this Court. The Court found that the petitioners shall be subjected to medical examination by an expert medical board having the same constitution as specified in the order passed by the Supreme Court as was noted therein. Accordingly, the medical board was constituted and the petitioners were directed to be re-examined.

2. The order dated 06.08.2025 since has taken the entire background into consideration, therefore, the same is extracted as under:-

“1. W.P.(C) 9074/2025 has been filed by the petitioner, a 29 year old Scheduled Tribe (ST) candidate from Manipur, who has been diagnosed with progressive bilateral sensorineural hearing loss.

2. It is submitted that the petitioner holds a valid Disability Certificate bearing no. MNO310419960009726 (issued by the Issuing Medical Authority, Churachandpur, Manipur) certifying 66% permanent hearing impairment in both ears. The said certification was issued in accordance with the guidelines for assessing the extent of specified disability under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act, 2016), notified by the Government of India vide S.O. 76(E) dated 04.01.2018. The petitioner has also been issued Unique Disability ID (UDID) Card by the Government of India.

3. It is submitted that these documents attest to the petitioner’s status as a person with a benchmark disability.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that, despite the aforesaid certification, respondent nos.4 to 6 [Safdarjung Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), and Army Hospital (Research & Referral) respectively]

have conducted multiple, inconsistent assessments of the petitioner’s medical / disability condition. It is submitted that these assessments have resulted in arbitrarily low disability percentages, wholly at variance with the petitioner’s duly certified benchmark disability status.

5. It is pointed out that the petitioner successfully cleared Civil Services Examination, 2024 conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), under the PwBD-3 category.

6. Following the results, the petitioner was required to undergo a general medical examination under the Civil Services Examination Rules, 2024 (Rules). It is submitted that contrary to the mandatory provisions under Rule 2(3) of Annexure III, which stipulate that candidates belonging to the Persons with Benchmark Disability (PwBD) category shall be examined exclusively by a Benchmark Disability Expert Panel (BDEP) constituted at AIIMS, New Delhi, the petitioner was examined, in the first instance, at Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. It is submitted that the Safdarjung report dated 06.03.2025 recorded that the petitioner suffers from mere 1.3% hearing loss, without providing any audiometric data, diagnostic details, or explanation as to how such a figure was calculated.

7. Subsequently, the petitioner appeared before AIIMS, New Delhi, on 0