The Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal from an MBBS student in Bihar with a physical disability, challenging his ineligibility to continue his studies. The court has instructed the college and National Medical Commission to respond while ensuring the student’s admission remains intact. The case raises significant issues regarding disability rights and fair treatment.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday (Feb 10th) agreed to hear a plea filed by an MBBS student with a physical disability against an order that declared him ineligible to continue his course at a government medical college in Bihar.
A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and K Vinod Chandran issued a notice to the college in Bettiah, Bihar, and the National Medical Commission (NMC), directing them to respond within two weeks.
“Till then, the petitioner’s admission shall not be disturbed,”
the court ordered.
The petitioner, who suffers from benchmark locomotor disability (muscular dystrophy in the lower limbs) with 58% impairment, has challenged the decision that declared him unfit to pursue the MBBS course.
His plea, filed through advocate Mayank Sapra, requests a fresh assessment of his competency under the NMC guidelines and Supreme Court rulings.
According to the plea, the petitioner had already undergone two disability assessments, resulting in valid disability certificates issued on June 24, 2022, and August 31, 2024.
Despite this, he was asked to undergo further reassessments, causing undue hardship and financial burden.
The petitioner had successfully cleared NEET-UG 2024 and was found eligible to pursue an MBBS degree. After enrolling in the college and attending classes for two months, an office order was issued in December 2024, instructing him and three other students to submit a fresh disability certificate.
The verification was conducted at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences (IGIMS) in Patna. The petitioner complied and reported for his scheduled medical examination.
However, on January 24, 2025, the college issued an order declaring him unfit to continue the medical course.
The petition highlights that the decision lacked transparency, stating:
“This decision was communicated without any explanation, detailed reasoning, or supporting medical inferences, leaving the petitioner in a state of confusion and distress.”
The student has urged the Supreme Court to quash the January 24 order and sought compensation for financial losses incurred due to the “arbitrary medical assessments” conducted by IGIMS, Patna.
With the Supreme Court’s intervention, the case raises crucial questions about disability rights, medical education, and fair treatment under the law. The final verdict could set a precedent for similar cases in the future.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
