The Supreme Court in the case Albin Joseph v Commissioner for Entrance Examination & Or’s refused to grant admission to a candidate who is having 80% disability, the Supreme Court recently affirmed the Kerela High Court’s Order.
The petitioner who is suffering from MeningoMyclac (Post-Surgical) with paraplegia locomotive disability of lower limbs, to the extent of 60% had claimed admission to the MBBS curriculum under the earmarked PWD quota, the petitioner appeared in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) UG – 2019 for admission to the MBBS and the allied courses and had obtained 58.76 percentile and had thereafter applied for allotment before the Kerela High Court.
The single bench before refusing to grant the relief referred to clause 5.3 of the prospectus for Kerela Engineering, Architect and Medical Courses (KEAM) – 2019:
The learned judge observed in the impugned judgement 18.07.2019 that the authorities have taken into account all the relevant aspects and have rightly reached the conclusion that the student is medically unfit, to pursue the MBBS studies. It would not be appropriate for the count to sit over the views of the experts to grant any relief in the writ petition, beside satisfying the bench, mark eligibility criteria an aspirant would also have to satisfy the test of being physically capable or suitable to undertake the MBBS course.
The division bench further affirmed the order of Single judge bench:
The court should not substitute its own views when the opinion of the Medical Board is available on the issue. The experts from different medical discipline examined the extent of disability and determined in the Ext.R1 (e) report that the practitioner will not be able to provide basic life saving procedure and it will be difficult for the 80% disabled aspirant to pursue and complete the MBBS curriculum. If such be the categorial opinion of the Medical Board Constituted in the Court’s order and the prospectus permits determination of suitability too satisfactory pursue the course, the denial of admission to the PWD quota seat for the appellant cannot in our assessment, be faulted, the precise reason for determining the unsuitability of the student to pursue the MBBS course is reflected by the Medical Board and this is consistent with the parameters indicated in the prospectus, According to the Court.
Justice MR Shah and BV Nagarathna while upholding the High Court’s order the bench said
The learned single judge has rightly denied the relief of admission which is rightly confirmed by the division bench of the High Court, having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the opinion given by the Medical Board that the Petitioner is having 80% disability.
The report given on 29.05.2019 Ext.R1 (d) by the Medical Board determined the percentage of disability of the student at 85% but it was also found that he was not eligible to pursue the MBBS curriculum, another medical board was constituted to examine the applicant on his capability to undertake the MBBS course, from the neurological side the expert was of the opinion that it will be difficult for the student to pursue and complete the course satisfactorily, According to the Orthopedic Professor in the Medical Board, the student will not be able to fulfill all requirements of curriculum of the MBBS course.
The petitioner wasn’t eligible for the curriculum as it was being constituted by the Medical Board to assess that weather the aspirant in the PWD quota possess sufficient motor ability as required had opined.
