LAWS(BOM)-2020-11-348

YASH RAJENDRA PATIL Vs. GRANT GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE

Decided On November 24, 2020
Yash Rajendra Patil Appellant
V/S
Grant Government Medical College Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Grant Government Medical College and Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, upon clinical examination of the petitioner, has opined that he is not eligible for Person with Disability (PwD) quota, but eligible for medical/dental course. A certificate has been issued to that effect on November 18, 2020, which is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he is suffering from visual impairment to the extent of 40%; therefore, he is eligible to be accommodated on a seat reserved for the PwD and to pursue study in the medical course on the basis of a Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Authority, Solapur, Maharashtra dated September 19, 2020.

(3.) However, Ms. Kantharia, learned GP appearing for the respondents has joined issue by placing before us a notice dated October 26, 2020 on the subject of "Disabilities for which the designated MCC Disability Centre are capable of issuing Certificate as per MCI Guidelines" issued by the Government of India, Directorate General of Health Services, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi. In terms thereof, visual impairment can be certified by 8 (eight) medical colleges. Grant Government Medical College, J.J. Hospital is one of the colleges included in the annexure to the notice which is designated by the Medical Counseling Committee (MCC) as one of the disability centres competent to issue a certificate of disability. Ms. Kantharia has also referred to page 67 of the Information Brochure issued by the Government of Maharashtra pertaining to NEET UG-2020, wherein the list of disability centres designated by the MCC finds place. According to her, it is not open to the petitioner to rely upon any certificate of disability issued by any authority/officer, other than those forming part of the notice dated October 26, 2020. She thus submits that there is no reason for the court to interfere with the impugned certificate.