Justice Pankaj Bhatia, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench
Designated Centre Under National Medical Council Can’t Reassess Candidate's Disability In Terms Of Certificate Issued By UDID Authority: Allahabad High Court
|The Petition before the Allahabad High Court was filed by the petitioner suffering from benchmark disability as defined under the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
While granting relief to a disabled medical aspirant, the Allahabad High Court has held that authorities designated in terms of the guidelines issued by the National Medical Commission Act cannot reassess the disability suffered by the candidate in terms of the certificate issued by the UDID Authority.
The Petition before the High Court was filed by the petitioner suffering from the benchmark disability as defined under the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The Single Bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia held, “...the only function which can be assigned to the authorities designated in terms of the guidelines issued by the National Medical Commission Act can be to assess the ‘functional disability’ for which the candidate would have to undergo test to form a view as to whether the person who has applied for NEET Examination is functionally able to undergo the studies and the rigours of the course. The same does not authorize the designated agency to reassess the disability suffered by the candidate in terms of the certificate issued by the UDID Authority.”
Advocate Diwakar Singh Gautam represented the Petitioner, while Additional Solicitor General of India represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The case as set up by the Petitioner was that the Petitioner, belonging to the Other Backward Class, was assessed with 70% permanent disability in relation to his body and leg. He was issued a Unique Disability ID (UDID) by the Competent Authority. The petitioner obtained All India Rank 997 in the NEET Examination in the category of PwBD. When the petitioner appeared before the Medical Institute, BHU, he filed an application and appeared before the Three Member Team which granted a medical certificate showing his disability assessed at 31% disability, however, he was declared qualified to undertake medical studies in the functional disability test.
It was argued that as the benefit of the disability assessed by the Centre notified in the scheme was less than 40%, he would naturally not be entitled to the benefit of reservation accorded to the students suffering from benchmark disability which is more than 40%. The said medical certificate was challenged alongwith a prayer that the petitioner having been issued a UDID demonstrating that the disability suffered by the petitioner is more than 40%, the benefit of reservation could not be denied to him. The said certificate was also assailed on the ground of having not been issued in terms of Notification Dated March 12,2024 issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment.
Reasoning
Referring to Rights of Persons with Disability Rules, 2017, the Bench explained that Rule 19 of the said Rules prescribes that a person to whom a certificate is issued under Rule 18 shall be entitled for all the facilities, concessions and benefits admissible for persons under the scheme of the Government and of Non-Government Organization. Thus, the certificate once issued is valid for claiming the benefits as flow in pursuance to the prescriptions contained in the Act and the various statutes. “The said once issued under the statute and the rules framed cannot be overridden by any assessment done by any authority which is not an authority specified under the Act and the Rules”, it added.
The Bench noticed that even the certificate issued by the authority designated under the NMC Act certified that the petitioner is not suffering from any functional disability to undergo MBBS Course, however, the same assessed the disability of 31%. This was less than 40% which is prescribed for claiming the benefit which flow in favour of the person with benchmark disability defined under Section 2(r) of the Act. Considering that the disability of the petitioner had been reassessed by the designated centre in terms of the guidelines prescribed by the National Medical Council, the Bench stated,"The said guidelines itself appear to be in variance with the interim guidelines for assessment method as were produced before the Supreme Court which led to the disposal of Writ Petition (Civil) No.1093 of 2022 (supra)."
Considering the fact that the petitioner qualified in the functional disability test and was found suitable for undergoing medical studies, the Bench held that the disability certificate issued by the authority and reflected in the UDID would prevail for the benefit of the grant of reservation.
Allowing the Petition, the Bench held, “The functional disability test of the petitioner has been certified by the authority designated under the NMC Act, thus, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the petitioner would be entitled to register for NEET Examination which are opened from 08.08.2025 to 11.08.2025 and the petitioner would be extended the benefit of reservation to which he is entitled in accordance with law.”
Cause Title: Maaz Ahmad v. U.O.I. (Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC-LKO:46235)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocates Diwakar Singh Gautam, Rajeiu Kumar Tripathi
Respondent: A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Advocates Gyanendra Kumar Srivastava, Shashank Bhasin, Syed Mohammad Haider Rizv