Omkar Ramchandra Gond vs. The Union of India and Others
Background
The appellant, a NEET (UG) 2024 qualifier from Latur, Maharashtra, has a certified 45% speech and language disability (from a repaired cleft palate) and applied for an MBBS seat under the Persons with Disability (PwD) and OBC categories. Despite qualifying and being placed in the merit list, the Disability Assessment Board found him "not eligible" for the medical course purely because his quantified disability percentage crossed a threshold, without separately assessing whether he could actually perform as a doctor. He was denied admission and approached the Bombay High Court, which did not grant timely relief before the admission deadline passed, prompting his appeal to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that a high quantified disability percentage cannot, by itself, disqualify a benchmark-disability candidate from a medical seat: the Disability Assessment Board must specifically opine on whether, despite the disability, the candidate can actually pursue the course, and must give reasons if it finds the candidate ineligible. The Court directed that such negative opinions be subject to judicial review, with courts able to seek an independent opinion from a premier medical institute. Acting on an interim order, the Court had already referred the appellant to Maulana Azad Medical College, which gave a favourable report, and the appellant had already been provisionally admitted; this judgment confirmed that admission as valid in law, set aside the High Court's order, and allowed the appeal.
Lesson Learnt
A disability percentage number alone cannot be used as a mechanical cut-off to deny admission or opportunity: assessment boards must individually evaluate whether a person's actual functional capability allows them to pursue the course or job, and any negative finding must be reasoned and is open to independent medical review.