Supreme Court Affirms High Court's Order Refusing MBBS Admission To Candidate Having 80% Disability

The bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna while upholding High Court's order said,

"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 and, therefore, he is unfit to pursue and complete the MBBS curriculam, the learned Single Judge has rightly denied the relief of admission which is rightly confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court."

Before the Kerala High Court, the petitioner, who was 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. He had appeared in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) UG - 2019 for admission to MBBS and allied courses and had obtained 58.76 percentile and had thereafter applied for allotment.

The medical board which was constituted to assess whether the aspirant in the PWD quota possess sufficient motor ability as required had opined that he wasn't eligible for the curriculum.

Referring to Clause 5.3 of the Prospectus for Kerala Engineering, Architect and Medical Courses (KEAM) - 2019, the Single Judge while refusing to grant the relief had said,

"Besides satisfying the benchmark eligibility criteria, an aspirant would also have to satisfy the test of being physically capable or suitable, to undertake the MBBS course, the learned Judge observed in the impugned judgment (18.7.2019) that the authorities have taken into account all 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 court to sit over the views of the experts to grant any relief in the Writ Petition."

The order of the Single Judge was further affirmed by the division bench.

"According to us, 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. Moreover, 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 petitioner 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 categorical opinion of the Medical Board constituted on court's order and the Prospectus permits determination of suitability to satisfactorily pursue the course, the denial of admission to the PWD quota seat for the appellant, cannot in our assessment, be faulted."

Case Title: Albin Joseph v Commissioner For Entrance Examinations & Ors| SLP 18294/ 2019

Click Here To Read/Download High Court Judgment