Dismissed

Namrata Anil Ghorpade v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC9 Oct 2012WP/2035/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction for PCAET admission under physically handicapped quota despite her new disability assessment showing 25%, below the 40-70% requirement. Court dismissed petition on eligibility grounds but finalized rules on provisional admissions.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; direction issued to admit only after Special Medical Board verification; ad-interim stay vacated.

Namrata Anil Ghorpade Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

gopi

¶2

wp-2035-12

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

¶4

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.2035 OF 2012

¶6

Dr. Namrata Anil Ghorpade ) Age Adult, Occu. Doctor, ) R/at. Sent Monica College, ) Savedi Road, Ahmednagar-414003 )..Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.The State of Maharashtra ) 2.The Secretary, Medical Education ) and Drug Department of ) Maharashtra, Mantralaya, ) Mumbai. ) 3.The Direector, The Direectorate ) of Ayurveda, Maharashtra ) State, Mumbai, Government ) Dental College and Hospital ) Building, 4^th Floor, St. George's ) Hospital Compound, P.Dmello ) Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001. ) 4.The Dean, (Designated Authority ) R.A. Podar Medical College ) (Ayurvedic), Dr. Annie Besant ) Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018. )..Respondents.

¶9

Mr. Sachin Dhakephalkar, for the petitioner. Mr. G.W. Mattos, A.G.P. For respondents.

¶10

CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 09 October 2012.

¶11

ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per Chief Justice):

¶12

In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondent authorities to take fresh selection process of PGA-CET 2012 for the admission to M.D./M.S. (Ayurvedic) Post Graduate Courses particularly in physically handicapped quota.

1/7

gopi

wp-2035-12

The petitioner passed her H.S.C. Examination in February, 2004 with 58% marks and thereafter secured admission for BAMS degree course in CSMSS Ayurved College, Aurangabad. The said admission was secured as a general candidate and not as a physically handicapped candidate. The petitioner got BAMS degree in November 2009 with 56.45% marks and after completing her internship in the year 2010-2011, the petitioner appeared at the PGACET 2012 Examination for the M.D/M.S. (Ayurvedic) Post Graduate Course. The petitioner secured 10^th position amongst students of the Physically Handicapped category. Four seats for admission to the M.D/M.S. (Ayurved) are available for the current academic year. The final merit list was declared on 9 July 2012 and the petitioner's name figured at Serial No.3 in the Physically Handicapped students quota.

¶17

When the petitioner appeared for counseling and verification of the documents on 14 September 2012, the petitioner was informed by the Verification Committee that the petitioner was not eligible for admission in the physically handicapped students quota, because her disability could not be considered as disability of locomotive disability of lower limbs between 50% and 70%. Hence the present petition.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner had relied upon Rule 5.7(3) of the Rules called “Procedure for Selection to Post Graduate Courses in Ayurveda for 2012-13” published by the Directorate of Ayurved (Competent Authority) Maharashtra State. The said Rule reads as follow:-

¶19

“5.7 Physically Handicapped:

¶20

As per Postgraduate Medical Education Regulation and government resolution dt. 11-01-2011 and central

2/7

gopi

wp-2035-12

government guidelines & Amendment Notification No.MCI.19(1)/2008-Med/54470, Dt. 25-03-2009

¶25

1(a). 3% seats of the annual sanctioned intake capacity shall be filled up by candidates with lomotory disability of lower limbs between 50% to 70%.

¶26

Provided that in case any seat in this 3% quota remains unfilled on account of unavailability of candidates with locomotory disability of lower limbs between 50% to 70% then any such unfilled seat in this 3% quota shall be filled up by persons with locomotory disability of lower limbs between 40% to 50% - before they are included in the annual sanctioned seats of State Quota.

¶27

…........

¶28

Candidate is required to submit the proof of his/her disability by way of a certificate (issued in year 2012) in prescribed proforma form Civil Surgeon of a District Hospital/Medical Board/Medical Superintendent of a Government Medical College/Hospital in Maharashtra; or from the Director of All India Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Haji Ali, Mumbai; (as per Prescribed Proforma) at the time of verification of disability. However, Verification of the disability will be carried out by Special Medical Board constituted for this purpose by Competent Authority and decision of the Special Medical Board will be final. The date and place of Special Medical Board shall be communicated by the way of notifications.”

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner had already produced before the respondents the certificates issued by Civil Surgeon of District Hospital at Ahmednagar certifying that the petitioner was having locomotive disability to the extent of 50%, the petitioner could not have been

3/7

gopi

wp-2035-12

considered as ineligible for admission for the Post Graduation in physically handicapped students quota. Serious grievance was made that without verification of her disability by the Special Medical Board as required by the Rules, no other authority should have declared the petitioner as ineligible.

¶34

In view of the above Rules, by our order dated 28 September 2012 we had directed the respondents to constitute a Special Medical Board in accordance with the above Rules and to send the petitioner for examination by the said Medical Board for verification of her disability. The said order specifically mentions that disability of spine must also be considered as a locomotor disability and that the petitioner cannot be excluded from consideration for the seat reserved for physically handicapped candidates on the ground that disability is that of spine and not on lower limbs.

¶35

Accordingly the petitioner was examined by the Special Medical Board comprising of the following:-

¶36

Dr. Sanjay Jagtap, Professor & HOD, Orthopedic Department, Grant Medical College (Chairman)

¶37

Dr. Vernan Velho,

¶38

Professor & HOD, Neurosurgery, Grant Medical College, (Member)

¶39

Dr. Kamlesh Jagiasi, Associate Professor, Neurology Department, Grant Medical College

¶40

Manohar Pajai, Physiotherapist, HOD, Department of Physiotherapy, Grant Medical College.

4/7

wp-2035-12

gopi

The said Board examined the petitioner on 4 October 2012 and had submitted the following report:-

¶45

“Name of the Patient: Namrata Anil Ghorpade Clinical Findings: Clinical Examination of spine: Step felt at L5-S1 S.L.R. Is normal bilaterally.

¶46

Muscle power Grade 5 of both Lower Limbs.

¶47

X-ray shwos Grade II Spondylolisthesis of L5 over S1 which is also suggestive on M.R.I.

¶48

Clinically patient walks without support.

¶49

We are of the opinion that this is correctible condition. In view of above findings, her Disability amounts to 25% at present.”

¶50

In view of the above, Mr. Mattos, learned A.G.P., has submitted that the petitioner's disability is found to be 25%, which is less than 40% which shall be minimum disability for seeking benefit of reservation of seats for physically handicapped students. It is submitted that the disability has to be between 40% and 70%. The petitioner does not fall within the same bracket. The petitioner cannot be considered to be eligible for admission on the basis of the physically handicapped candidates quota.

¶51

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the respondents did not follow the proper procedure before giving provisional admission to three other students, one of whom was less meritorious than the petitioner.

¶52

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, while we are unable to give any relief to the petitioner as the petitioner's disability has been assessed by the Special Medical Board as less than 40%, we cannot uphold the procedure being followed by the respondents to grant provisional admission on the basis of prima

5/7

wp-2035-12

gopi

facie opinion formed by the two officers, may be Medical Officers of the Ayurvedic Department. Granting provisional admission by making prima facie verification of disability cannot be said to be proper procedure in accordance with the Rules. The decision to give admission to a student of a seat reserved for the physically handicapped candidate can only be taken after the Special Medical Board examines the concerned candidate. It would not be safe to leave even a prima facie decision to be taken by the persons who are not part of a Special Medical Board. Otherwise the procedure would not only be contrary to the Rules for admission to the medical course, but the situation could also be misused in a given case. We may not be treated to have expressed any opinion about such an abuse or misuse of the procedure in the present case where three other candidates were given provisional admission without having been examined by the Special Medical Board as the examination subsequently conducted by the Special Medical Board on 24 September 2012 did find them to be falling within the definition of physically handicapped students with disability between 50% and 70% as required by the Rules. Hence the Authorities henceforth shall follow the procedure prescribed in the above quoted Rules without making any deviation for the purpose of granting provisional admission.

¶57

Hence, while dismissing the petition we direct the respondents to ensure that admissions to seats in Medical/Engineering Colleges reserved for physically handicapped students shall be given only after receiving the report of the Special Medical Board constituted for verification of the disability of the concerned candidates. After notifying the constitution of the Special Medical Board, the date and place of verification by the Special Medical Board shall be intimated to candidates who have applied for admission to the physically handicapped students quota, with

6/7

wp-2035-12

gopi

certificates of civil surgeons. In case where number of candidates applying under the physically handicapped quota far exceeds the number of seats available, it may become time consuming and detrimental to the timely completion of the admission process, to send all candidates at once to the Board. In such circumstances, it will be open to the authorities to send first three meritorious candidates, per seat, to the Medical Board. In case none of the three candidates are found suitable by the Medical Board then next three candidates could be sent and so on.

¶62

The petition is accordingly disposed of. The ad-interim stay granted earlier stands vacated.

¶63

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶64

(N.M. JAMDAR, J.)

¶65

7/7

Namrata Anil Ghorpade v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Namrata Anil Ghorpade v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mpower Realty Llp.. and 2 Ors. Vs Sarojkumar Nathmal Agarwar, and 12 Ors.

Mr. Sarjerao Janardhan Hande and Ors. Vs Maharashtra State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Ltd.

Vijaykumar Ramrao Dhoke Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

O.P. Roongta Vs Icici Securities Ltd.

Khushnuma I. Khan and Raghib I. Khan Vs Asadullah Khan @ Sameer Khan and 3 Ors.

Abdul Sattar Lakdawalla Vs Sidhram N.Gardas and Ors.