Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Constitutional LawSupreme Court of India

Om Rathod vs The Director General of Health Services & Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 836Decided 25 Oct 2024
Not available
Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud · Justice J.B. Pardiwala · Justice Manoj Misra

Background

Om Rathod, a person with lower-limb myopathy (a locomotor disability), scored 601/720 in NEET-UG 2024, securing an all-India PwD rank of 84. Despite holding a valid disability certificate, a mandatory Disability Assessment Board at AIIMS Nagpur certified him as 88% disabled and therefore ineligible for an MBBS seat. The Bombay High Court (Nagpur bench) upheld this certification, so he approached the Supreme Court, which in the interim ordered a fresh assessment by a five-member board at AIIMS Delhi.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that disability assessment for medical admissions cannot rely on a rigid "benchmark disability" model but must instead apply a functional competence test, assessing what a candidate can actually do, with reasonable accommodations and assistive devices, rather than just measuring the percentage of impairment. It found that the assessment process had failed to follow the government's own 2022 circular requiring a disabled doctor/health professional on every Disability Assessment Board, and that reasonable accommodation is a gateway right without which other constitutional guarantees for persons with disabilities become meaningless. The Court directed that a supernumerary MBBS seat be created for Rathod at AIIMS Nagpur, protected him from victimisation, and ordered the government to overhaul disability assessment guidelines nationally, including mandating disabled experts on assessment boards.

Lesson Learnt

Disability certification for professional/educational admissions must assess a person's actual functional ability to perform the course (with reasonable accommodations), not just apply a mechanical disability-percentage cut-off, and denial of reasonable accommodation itself amounts to unconstitutional discrimination.

Om Rathod vs The Director General of Health Services & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware