The Supreme Court of India has recently directed the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, to constitute a fresh medical board to assess the disability of a National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) UG 2024 aspirant who applied under the SC/PwBD category. The Court emphasized that the evaluation must be done in line with its earlier rulings in Om Rathod v. Director General of Health Sciences (2024) and Anmol v. Union of India & Ors. (2025).
The medical board to be formed will include five medical professionals, with mandatory inclusion of a specialist in locomotor disabilities and a neuro-physician.
“Denying relief to the petitioner merely because the NMC is in the process of revising its guidelines would be unjustified,” the Supreme Court observed.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Declares 'Both Hands Intact' Requirement for MBBS Admissions Unconstitutional
In the Om Rathod case, the Supreme Court ruled that a candidate’s benchmark disability alone cannot be grounds for disqualification from the MBBS course. The Court held that the disability must be specifically assessed to determine whether it prevents the candidate from pursuing medical education.
Similarly, in the Anmol case, the Court struck down the National Medical Commission’s (NMC) guidelines which mandated that MBBS aspirants must have "both hands intact, with intact sensation and sufficient strength." The Court found such guidelines to be arbitrary and unconstitutional.
In the present matter, the petitioner, a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) category, secured a category rank of 176 in NEET UG 2024. He suffers from congenital absence of several fingers in both hands and also has a disability in his left foot. Despite his high merit rank, the disability certificate was denied to him based on the existing NMC guidelines.
“The petitioner has performed exceedingly well in NEET UG 2024 and is high on the merit list. His future cannot remain uncertain just because the NMC’s revised guidelines are awaited,” the Court stated.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta rejected the submission made by the NMC and the Union of India that final revised guidelines would be issued only before the counselling for MBBS (UG) 2025-26.
Read Also:- NEET Qualification Mandatory for MBBS Abroad: Supreme Court Ruling
Before approaching the Supreme Court, the petitioner had moved the Delhi High Court. The High Court formed a three-member medical board, which found him ineligible. Dissatisfied, the petitioner filed a Letter Patent Appeal, leading to a division bench forming another board, which also denied eligibility. This led to the current Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court.
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Rahul Bajaj argued that both the medical boards and the High Court overlooked key aspects. These include the petitioner’s outstanding academic record, high merit rank, and the availability of assistive technologies that could help him undertake the medical course effectively.
"In Om Rathod’s case, the candidate did not have both hands, yet was allowed to pursue MBBS based on an expert evaluation by Dr. Satendra Singh,” Bajaj highlighted.
In the Anmol case, the candidate suffered from a 50% locomotor disability, club foot, and a condition called Phocomelia in one hand, along with a 20% speech and language disability. Despite these challenges, the Court permitted him to join MBBS. Advocate Bajaj pointed out that the current petitioner’s condition is comparatively better than those in both landmark cases.
Taking into account the past judgments and the facts presented, the Supreme Court ordered AIIMS to reconstitute a five-member medical board. The board is required to conduct a fresh evaluation of the petitioner’s disability and submit its findings to the Court in a sealed cover by April 15.
Case Details: KABIR PAHARIA v. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION AND OTHERS|SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CIVIL) NO. 29275 OF 2024
