[NEET UG 2024] Reasonable Accommodation Not Limited To Those Suffering Disability Under 2016 Act: Madras HC Paves Way For Student Wearing Adult Diaper To Attend Exam

“Article 15(3) of the Constitution enables the State to make special provision for women and children. There is no justification in restricting the principle of reasonable accommodation only to those suffering from disabilities recognized by RPwD Act, 2016. All persons having disability have special needs. That does not mean the disabled as defined in the statute alone have special needs. Beneficial principles and doctrines have to be expansively construed and applied,” the court said.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that any candidate who was not necessarily suffering from any disability set out under the 2016 act but otherwise had special requirements or had a biological condition was entitled to reasonable accommodation.

The court also directed the examination authorities to ensure that all examination centres had suitable toilet facilities with water amenities and a minimum number of sanitary products so that the girls coming unprepared could use them. The court also suggested that the restrooms could be thoroughly inspected in advance and regularly thus limiting the frisking of candidates for a second time and thus, saving the candidates' precious time.

The court was hearing the plea of a NEET aspirant who, after meeting with a burn accident, was taking treatment for a Neurogenic Bladder. The doctors had certified that the candidate had a lack of urine control and needed to wear a diaper continuously which also had to be changed frequently. Though the candidate requested the authorities to permit her to write the exam wearing the diaper and to change it in between depending on her condition, since there was no response, she approached the court.

The court noted that the information bulleting issued by the National Testing Agency did not address the concerns of the candidate. Further, though another notification issued by the NTA specified that the candidates would be frisked and biometric attendance would be taken on entry from bio break/toilet break, a similar notification was not issued in connection with the NEET exam.

The court noted that if the permission sought by the candidate was denied, it would not enable her to write the exam, which would lead to discrimination forbidden by Article 14 of the Constitution. The court added that once it was recognized that an eligible candidate was entitled to write an exam, she must be placed on the same footing as any normal candidate.

The court also added that it would have been appropriate if the dress code specifically permitted the wearing of sanitary pads by girl children. The court added that the examination authorities should bear in mind the special needs of girl children in mind and provide reasonable accommodation.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.J.Anandakumar, for Mr.V.Purushothaman Reddy

Counsel for the Respondent: Mrs.Subharanjani Ananth, Mr.P.Karthick

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 183

Case Title: Ms. Monisha v The National Testing Agency and another

Case No: W.P.(MD)No.9920 of 2024