S KAVITHA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner has stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that she has completed her graduation in medicine on having obtained admission in 3% quota reservation for persons with disability. After completion of the graduation in medicine, it is stated that she has joined in Government service as Assistant Surgeon, Upgraded Primary Health center, Burgur. She has applied for admission into post graduate course in medicine claiming admission under the quota of disabled persons prescribed by the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the academic year 2011-12. Admittedly, 3% of seats are allotted to persons with disabilities for admission into post graduate courses.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that even though she has complied with the requirements of the reservation under the quota for disabled persons, and even though the certificate produced by her issued by the Medical Board, Government Mohan Kumaramangalam Medical College Hospital, Salem shows that she was having permanent disability, viz., Kyphoscoliosis with torticollis deformity of the spines and the extent of disability is 50%, at the time of counselling, since the respondents entertained doubt about her claim of admission under the Physically Handicapped quota, she, along with many others, who raised similar claims, was referred to the Special Medical Board, by proceedings of the Director of Medical Education dated 25.03.2011. THE Special Medical Board, which consisted of the Head of Department of the Orthopaedics, Stanley Medical College and Hospital, the Associate Professor of Kilpauk Medical College and Hospital, and Professor of Neurology, Madras Medical College and Hospital, after examining nearly 27 candidates about whom doubts were entertained by the Selection Committee, have found that the petitioner's lower limb and the upper limb are normal and therefore, she cannot claim admission under disability quota and consequently her claim for admission into the post graduate course came to be rejected.

(3.) ON the other hand, the Medical Council has filed a counter affidavit. It is also the submission of Mr. V.P. Raman, the standing counsel for MCI that the MCI has only directed 3% of seats to be given to the persons suffering from locomotor disability in the lower limb between 50% to 70%, which is according to the provisions of the Central Act and there is no contradiction. Admittedly, the petitioner is not suffering from any disability either in the lower limb or in the upper limb. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has no meaning.