Madras High Court
R.Sakeela vs The Secretary To Government on 6 July, 2021
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1118 of 2021
R.Sakeela ...Appellant
-Vs-
1.The Secretary to Government,
Higher Education Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
St. George Fort, Chennai.
2.The Secretary,
Selection Committee,
Directorate of Medical Education,
No.162, Periyar E.V.R.High Road,
Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.
3.The Director of Medical Education,
Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent against the
order dated 30.07.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.15696 of 2019.
For Appellant : Mr.S.R.Anbarasu
For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran,
Standing Counsel for Government.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/8
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.,]
Heard Mr.S.R.Anbarasu, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for the
Government appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. This Writ Appeal by the writ petitioner is directed against the
order dated 30.07.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.15696 of 2019.
3. The appellant filed the Writ petition to direct the respondents to
admit her in the MBBS Course for the academic year 2019-2020, in the
quota earmarked for persons with disabilities by relying upon a disability
certificate dated 21.05.2019, issued by the Regional Medical Board,
Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital, Tirunelveli. The Writ petition was
dismissed on the ground that the Medical Board, before whom the
appellant appeared as mentioned in the prospectus, had certified that the
appellant suffers from 85% disability and the Bench Mark is 80% and
therefore, she was disqualified to be considered for selection.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
4. Mr.S.R.Anbarasu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
would contend that the Court may note the plight of the appellant. She is
a young person, aged about 17 years and eager to pursue her medical
education, despite getting sufficient marks in the NEET, she is unable to
secure medical admission to MBBS Course on account of uncertainty in
the medical opinion as regards the percentage of her disability.
5. We have gone through the records produced by the appellant
before us and we are shocked to find that there are three different
percentages of disability attributed to the appellant by three expert
bodies. The first is a passbook issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu,
which is the basic document to certify the person is physically
challenged, unless this passbook is available, the candidate cannot apply
for any selection be it for educational purposes or for appointment under
the quota reserved for physically challenged person. This passbook is
issued after thorough verification of the disability suffered. The said
passbook was issued to the appellant on 16.09.2008, which certifies that
the appellant suffers from 70% disability. The appellant applied for
selection to the MBBS Course for the academic session 2019-2020 and
since she had fulfilled the eligible criteria fixed for physically challenged
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
person, she was allowed to participate in the selection process and she
was referred to the Medical Board in the Rajiv Gandhi Government
General Hospital, Chennai. Prior to the application, the appellant
appeared before the Doctor, Madras Medical College, as on outpatient,
wherein there is assessment of disability at 80%. This certificate has
been issued by Dr.K.Premalatha, M.B.B.S., D.R.M.R. The appellant also
subjected herself to medical examination in the Rajiv Gandhi
Government General Hospital, Chennai, as per the requirement under the
prospectus, which is as per MCI guidelines. In the said certificate,
percentage of disability has been assessed at 85%. Consequently, the
appellant was not eligible to be considered for selection under the quota
reserved for physically challenged persons. The appellant has a great
dilemma and for no fault on her. She is being medical admission to the
MBBS course though she has reasonable good scores in the NEET, the
learned Single Bench had dismissed the Writ Petition.
6. In our considered view the decision taken by the learned Writ
Court is perfectly in order. Since the Medical Board, which is authorised
to certify the disabilities of a candidate as per the MCI guidelines, is the
Regional Medical Board of the Rajiv Gandhi Government General
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
Hospital, Chennai. Interestingly, Dr.K.Premalatha, who had earlier
certified the petitioner to have 80% disability, when she appeared as an
outpatient. However, the collective opinion was the appellant suffered at
85% disability.
7. Mr.S.R.Anbarasu, learned counsel for the appellant would
submit that since there is an uncertainty, the Court may refer the
appellant to a different Medical Board, outside the State of Tamil Nadu
chosen from one among the 10 Medical Boards as mentioned in the
prospectus. In our considered view, it will be too late for the appellant to
make such a prayer, because the entire selection process for the academic
session 2019-2020 is already over. However, we are conscious of the
fact that the appellant had a traumatic experience. Therefore, we are of
the view that while confirming the order passed by the learned Single
Judge, we make an observation that if the appellant applies for the
selection to the MBBS course for the academic session 2021-2022 and
she is able to achieve the Bench Mark qualification in NEET and while
considering her under the quota reserved for physically challenged, the
concerned Medical Board may kindly bear in mind that young student
has been traumatic on account of uncertainty in the percentage of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
disability, when the Government of Tamil Nadu has certified that the
appellant suffered from 70% disability, the Medical Board as per medical
norms classifies her as 85% disability and one of the member of the
Board, while attending on the appellant as an outpatient in the
Government Hospital, certifies her as 80%. Therefore, reasonable care
and cause may be exercised by the concerned Board, while assessing the
appellant's disability percentage.
With the above observation, this Writ Appeal is disposed of. No
costs.
[T.S.S. J.,] [S.A.I. J.,]
06.07.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
vsm
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order
that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Higher Education Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
St. George Fort, Chennai.
2.The Secretary,
Selection Committee,
Directorate of Medical Education,
No.162, Periyar E.V.R.High Road,
Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.
3.The Director of Medical Education,
Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1118 of 2021
T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.,
and
S.ANANTHI, J.,
vsm
W.A.(MD)No.1118 of 2021
06.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
