Supreme Court Allows Candidate With Muscular Dystrophy To Participate In NEET-UG 2024 Counselling

The bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a plea by a candidate facing 88% muscular dystrophy and was disqualified from pursuing MBBS on the ground that the NMC Guidelines require bringing down the disability to less than 80% for those with petitioner's condition to pursue MBBS.

Notably, in Muscular Dystrophy, the individual's body muscles are progressively weakened and face a breakdown, making it difficult to carry out normal physical activities. Since the petitioner's disability could not be brought down to less than 80%, the Bombay High Court had refused to grant any relief.

On the previous hearing, the Court had requested  Dr Satendra Singh to assist the court in examining "notwithstanding the quantified disability, the petitioner can pursue the MBBS degree course."

Today, the Court perused the report of the expert doctor Satendra Singh, the founder of an organization by the name of Infinite Abilityhaving doctors who personally face disabilities. As per the report, the petitioner could pursue the course with the help of assistive devices.

The counsel for the National Medical Council however submitted that Dr. Singh was an expert in the field of physiology but not the present disease per se. Although he stated, “ I am not against the petitioner's admission”.

Justice JB Pardiwala interjected to say “ There are two reports now, give him a chance!”

The Court also noted that the petitioner had successfully scored 601/720 marks in the NEET-UG 2024 Exam despite the obstacles of his disability. Allowing the petitioner to appear for the counseling, the Bench however clarified that the present order shall not be treated as a precedent for future issues of law that may arise.

“We accordingly direct that the petitioner be permitted to participate in the ongoing counseling of NEET-UG 2024.”

“We clarify that this order is passed in the facts and circumstances of the case of the petitioner and shall not be construed as a concluding express opinion by this Court on the issues of law that may arise in an appropriate case.”

Notably, on a previous occasion, the Court also observed that there are no specific guidelines to assess disability with assistive devices as per the GOI gazette (March 2024) on assessing specified disabilities.

Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat and AOR Talha Abdul Rahman appeared for the petitioner.

Recently, the Supreme Court had ruled that the mere existence of benchmark disabilities should not be a ground to disqualify a person from MBBS course.

Case Details : OM RATHOD Versus THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF HEALTH SERVICES AND ORS.SLP(C) No. 21942/2024