1 - Kajal D/o Raju Khande Aged About 19 Years R/o House No. 4 v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Medical Education, Mahanadi Bhawan
Case Details
1 SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.09.24 17:04:18 +0530 2025:CGHC:48921-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5025 of 2025 1 - Kajal D/o Raju Khande Aged About 19 Years R/o House No. 4, Ward No. 16, Village- Charbhatha, Post- Mongrapali, Tahsil And Block - Bagbahara, Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Medical Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Of Medical Education Old Nurses Campus Dks Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Commissioner Of Medical Education North Block Sector-19, Swasthya Bhawan, 2nd Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Chhattisgarh.
Legal Reasoning
4 - National Testing Agency Through The Director (Exams), First Floor, N.S.I.C.-M.D.B.P. Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi, 110020 2 5 - The President Chhattisgarh State Medical Board, North Block, Sector-19, Svasthya Bhavan, Second Floor, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Pt. Javahar Laal Nehru Memorial Medical College Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s)
Legal Reasoning
For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)/State : Shri : Shri Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. For Respondent No. 4 : Shri P.R. Patankar, Advocate. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Decision
Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 24.09.2025 1. The present petition has been filed with the following prayer:- 10.1. That, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction, commanding the Respondent authorities to produce the entire records necessary for adjudication of the instant petition. 3 10.2. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction, direct the respondent to treat the petitioner eligible for reservation under Persons with Disability (PwD Category) and grant her admission in MBBS Course. 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction, of appropriate the nature to grant admission to the petitioner in MBBS Course in the respondent No. 6 PT. Javahar Laal Nehru Memorial Medical College, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 10.4. That, any other writ, order, directions or relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. 2. Facts of the case, as projected in the writ petition, are that the petitioner, who is a student, has prayed for an appropriate writ, order direction directing the respondents - State Government to treat the petitioner eligible for reservation under the category of Persons with Disability (PwD category) and grant her admission in MBBS Course for the academic year 2024-25. She is eligible to pursue MBBS Course and she shall be granted admission under the PwD category as she is 4 suffering from 'locomotor disability', but the respondent State Government vide letter dated 21.08.2025 whereby the Chhattisgarh State Medical Board disqualified the petitioner for MBBS course stating that, as per the test report of the petitioner dated 21.08.2025 conducted by the Doctors of Bhimrao OPD, Orthopedic Department Ambedkar Memorial Hospital, Raipur, that report has been examined by the medical board and they found in the report that, "Radial club hand (congenital absence of radius bone with shortened & curved ulna) with partial absence of carpal bone with complete absence of thumb in right upper limb" and as per the said report they disqualified the petitioner for medical education pursuant to Appendix-H-1 to notification dated 13.05.2019 issued by the Board of Governors in super-session of Medical Council of India, which has been published in the Gazette of India, whereas it has been mentioned as "Both hands intact, with intact sensations, sufÏcient strength and range of motion are essential to be considered eligible for medical course". Even otherwise the petitioner is eligible under Regulations, 2019 also as she fulfill the required percentage disability between 40-80%. The minimum percentage disability to be 5 eligible for availing reservation under PwD is 40%. That, the "PwD not eligible for medical course" is stated as per the Regulations, 2019 to be beyond and in excess of 80%, which is not the case in hand. The relevant provisions of Regulations, 2019 "Both hands intact, with intact sensation, sufÏcient strength and range of motion are essential to be considered" has been applied by the State Government to non-suit the petitioner for medical course in an arbitrary manner and without application of mind. While rejecting the petitioner’s candidature to be not eligible for medical course, the State Government has not at all considered the fact that PwD is bound to have certain problems including the parameter mentioned in Appendix 'H' [Both hands intact, with intact sensation, sufÏcient strength and range of motion are essential to be considered) with clause (f) of Clause 4(1) of the Regulations, 2019. While applying the parameter mentioned in Appendix 'H' with clause (f) of Clause 4(1) of Regulations, 2019, the State Government did not consider the facts that, petitioner has good muscle power, does gripping and activities of daily living with modifications and range of motion in hand is not nil, rather restricted, does activities of daily living with 6 little difÏculty and left side dominant and her left hand is perfectly fine; affected body part is right hand only, but the respondent have disqualified the petitioner. Hence this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is fully eligible under the Regulations, 2019 as she fulfills the required percentage of disability between 40% and 80%, which makes her entitled to reservation under the PwD category. It is urged that the State Government has arbitrarily applied Appendix “H” [requiring both hands intact with intact sensation, sufÏcient strength, and range of motion] to non-suit the petitioner, without appreciating that PwDs are bound to have some functional limitations. It is further submitted that the petitioner has good muscle power, is able to perform gripping and activities of daily living with minor modifications, her range of motion is restricted but not nil, and her left hand is dominant and perfectly functional, with only the right hand affected. He further submits that the petitioner is a meritorious student, having qualified NEET (UG) with an All- India Rank of 794026, SC category rank of 93778, and PwBD (Person with benchmark disability) category rank of 1759, and 7 her legitimate aspiration to become a doctor ought not to be frustrated on arbitrary grounds. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submission advanced by the counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that after proper appreciation of the case of the petitioner at the time of counselling for NEET-UG 2025, the case of the petitioner was considered under PwD category and in respect of examination of her disability the committee was constituted under the chairmanship of the Director Medical Education and the chairman State Medical Board Chhattisgarh, the Dean of J.N.M College, Professor of Orthopedic Department of J.N.M College who after examination of the disability of the petitioner found the disability of Radial club hand (congenital absence of radius bone with shortened & curved ulna) with partial absence of carpal bone with complete absence of thumb in right upper limb and since the right hand of the petitioner was intact and as such as per the Gazette Notification issued by the Government of India on dated 14.05.2019, the petitioner is not eligible for the admission in MBBS Course. The action of the authorities is just and proper warranting no interference of this Court. 8 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record appended with the writ petition. 6. On the last date of hearing, this Court directed the State counsel to seek instructions in the matter, as the disability of the petitioner has been certified as 45%, by the District Board, whereas the State Medical board, has found the petitioner unfit for the admission into MBBS course. As per the notification dated 13.05.2019, a person is eligible for the said admission, if the disability is between 40%- 80%. From perusal of (Annexure P/1), by which the petitioner has found to be unfit for the said admission, no percentage of disability has been mentioned by the Said board. 7. During the course of hearing, learned counsel would refer to appended H-1 of the notification dated 13.05.2019, which provides the guidelines regarding admission of student with specified disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 with respect to admission in MBBS Course. The said notification provides the column regarding the disability range. Under the PwD quota, a candidate is 40- 80% of disability is entitled for admission in medical course, however, a specific clause has been provided that Both hands 9 intact, with intact sensations, sufÏcient strength and range of motion are essential to be considered eligible for medical course. 8. From the above stated facts narrated by the learned State counsel, it appears that the State Medical Board consisting of the Director Medical Examination, Dean J.N.M. and the Professor of Orthopedics Department of J.N.M. duly examined the petitioner and found that she is having the disability of Radial club hand (congenital absence of radius bone with shortened & curved ulna) with partial absence of carpal bone with complete absence of thumb in right upper limb and the said State Medical Board found that the right hand of the petitioner is intact and such she is not eligible for admission in MBBS Course. 9. On due consideration of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is quite vivid that the finding recorded by the State Medical Board is absolutely in accordance with appendex H-1 of the notification dated 13.05.2019 published in the Gazette of India. There is no infirmity or illegality in the opinion formed by the State Medical Board. 10. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Shoaib