Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case Patta Without SDM’s Prior Approval Is Void Ab Initio And Cannot Be Cancelled – It Never Legally Existed: Allahabad High Court Natural Guardian Means Legal Guardian: Custody Cannot Be Denied to Father Without Strong Reason: Orissa High Court Slams Family Court for Technical Rejection Affidavit Is Not a Caste Certificate: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside Zila Panchayat Member's Election for Failing Eligibility Under OBC Quota Confession Recorded By DCP Is Legally Valid Under KCOCA – Bengaluru DCP Holds Rank Equivalent To SP: Karnataka High Court Difference of Opinion Cannot End in Death: Jharkhand High Court Commutes Death Sentence in Maoist Ambush Killing SP Pakur and Five Policemen Mere Presence Of Beneficiary During Execution Does Not Cast Suspicion On Will: Delhi High Court Litigants Have No Right to Choose the Bench: Bombay High Court Rules Rule 3A Is Mandatory, Sends Writ to Kolhapur Testimony Must Be of Sterling Quality: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Grandfather in Rape Case, Citing Unnatural Conduct and Infirm Evidence Cheating and Forgery Taint Even Legal Funds: No Safe Haven in Law for Laundered Money: Bombay High Court Final Maintenance Is Not Bound by Interim Orders – Section 125 Determination Must Be Based on Real Evidence: Delhi High Court

Supreme Court Ruling Emphasizes Need for Detailed Disability Assessments in Admissions

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant order, the Supreme Court of India, led by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR, upheld the claims of petitioners with disabilities, stressing the importance of thorough disability assessments in admissions to educational institutions.

The case, titled Bambhaniya Sagar Vasharambhai v. Union of India & Ors., revolved around the evaluation of disability claims by a Medical Board and the subsequent admission of disabled students to medical courses. The Court's observations and directives from the judgment have drawn attention:

  1. Upholding Disability Claims: The Court, after reviewing reports issued by the Medical Board, upheld the petitioners' claims as persons with disabilities, stating, "No further clarification is necessary having regard to the range indicated by the Expert Board or Committee."
  2. Admission with Accommodations: The Supreme Court directed the respondents to treat the petitioners as persons with disabilities and consider their applications for admission, while also ensuring compliance with other admission parameters.
  3. Detailed Evaluation Required: The judgment highlighted the need for detailed evaluation and reasoning in disability assessments. The reports issued by the Medical Board lacked sufficient reasoning, and the Court directed the provision of a clarificatory note with elaborate reasoning based on the evaluation conducted.
  4. Consideration of Recent Developments: The Court emphasized that the evaluation should take into account recent developments in medical sciences and consider the potential aids that may assist disabled students in effectively participating in their chosen courses.
  5. Earmarking of Seats: The judgment directed the earmarking of seats for disabled candidates in the counseling process. It also stressed the importance of allocating these seats based on principles prescribed by law and conforming with merit.
  6. Benchmark Disability Criteria: The Court raised concerns about the benchmark disability criteria under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. It noted that the 40% threshold might result in excluding eligible candidates and directed the Union to consider steps to mitigate such anomalies.

The case will be listed for further proceedings on October 3, 2023.

This ruling underscores the significance of thorough and reasoned disability assessments, ensuring equal opportunities for disabled individuals in education and other fields. It also highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to disability criteria to avoid unintended exclusions.

"The Union shall consider steps to mitigate such anomalies, because a lower extent of disabilities bar benefits and at the same time render them functional, whereas higher extent of disability would entitle benefits, but also result in denying them the benefit of reservation."

The decision sets a precedent for fair and inclusive admissions processes in educational institutions across India, reflecting the commitment to uphold the rights of persons with disabilities.

Date of Decision: 22-09-2023

BAMBHANIYA SAGAR VASHARAMBHAI  vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.         

                   

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.comwp-content/uploads/2023/10/Bambhaniya_Sagar_Vasharambhai_vs_Union_Of_India_on_22_September_2023.pdf"]

Latest Legal News