Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010245542023 2026:GAU-AS:3765 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6489/2023 HIMADRI SHANKAR NATH AND 4 ORS SON OF LATE JAGAT CHANDRA NATH, VILL- DUBAPARA, MATIA, P.O.- DUBAPARA, P.S.- MORNOI, DIST- GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN- 783101. 2: SAYED AHMED SON OF SHRI EBAD ALI VILL- MORICHBARI RESERVE (KORTIMARI) P.O.- DHUMERGHAT P.S.- LAKHIPUR DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783330. 3: UPEN CHANDRA KALITA SON OF NIROD CH. KALITA VILL- BAPUJINAGAR WARD NO. 16 P.O.- BALADMARI DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101. 4: BIDYUT KUMAR NATH SON OF LATE RAJ KUMAR NATH VILL- DUBAPARA P.O.- DUBAPARA Page No.# 2/6 P.S.- MORNAI DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101. 5: SHERINAS BEGUM W/O- SRI SHEFAT ALI VILLAGE DHARAI P.O.- DHARAI DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:JOINT SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EMPOWERMENT OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (DIVYANGJAN) MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT (DGE AND T) VRC FOR HANDICAPPED A.K. AZAD ROAD GOPINATH NAGAR GUWAHATI- 781016 ASSAM. 4:THE MEDICAL AUTHORITY GOALPARA DEPARTMENT OF EMPOWERMENT OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT GOALPARA- 783121. Page No.# 3/6 5:CHAIRMAN AND MEMEBERS OF DISTRICT STANDING MEDICAL BOARD GOALPARA 783121. 6:THE PRINCIPAL OF GAUHATI MEDICAL COLLEGE GUWAHATI PIN NO. GUWAHATI- 781005 DISTRICT- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 7:THE CHAIRMAN OF STATE LEVEL POLICE RECRUITMENT BOARD ASSAM REHABARI GUWAHATI- 781008 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R C SAIKIA, MS. B DEVI,MR P BHARDWAJ,MS. K SAIKIA,MS. N DEY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MRS. R DEVI (r-2),MR. J K GOSWAMI,MR R M DAS, SC SOCIAL JUSTICE.,DY.S.G.I. BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA O R D E R 12.03.2026 Heard Mr. R.C Saikia, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. K. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners. Also heard Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for respondent No.7. Also heard Mr. R. M. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Assam and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Health and Family Welfare Department, Assam, appearing for the respective official respondents. 2. The writ petitioners are individually holding Disability certificates Page No.# 4/6 issued by the competent authority under the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment, Assam, indicating the degree and nature of their disability. According to the certificates held by them, each of the petitioners meet the “Bench Mark” disability criteria of 40% disability, thus making them eligible to seek Government employment as candidates belonging to the Person with Disability (PwD) category. As such, on the strength of these certificate(s), the petitioners had applied for and had taken part in the recruitment process initiated by the Government departments for filling up of a number of Grade-IV posts. However, after the selection process was over, the writ petitioners have been asked to appear before a specially constituted Medical Board so as to verify/reassess the nature and extent of the disability suffered by them. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition has been filed inter alia contending that since the petitioners are holding a Disability Certificate issued by the competent authority, there was no further requirement under the law or any legal justification to subject the petitioners to further scrutiny by another Medical Board, as have been done in their cases. 3. Taking note of the grievance expressed by the petitioners, this Court had directed the learned Standing Counsel, Health and FW Department, Assam, to obtain instructions. Today, when the matters were called up, Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Health and FW Department, Assam, submits that the role of the Health and FW Department, Assam, in these cases, is only to the extent of constituting a Special Medical Board so as to assess the nature and extent of disability suffered by the candidates, on the request of the Nodal Department i.e. the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment. Therefore, the Health Department does not have any Page No.# 5/6 independent stand in the matter. He further submits that on such verification, the disability of some of the candidates have been found to be less than the “Bench Mark” of 40% disability. Mr. Gogoi, however, submits that the outcome of the assessment by the specially constituted Medical Board have already been forwarded to the Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Assam, in respect of each candidate examined by the Board. 4. Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam and Mr. R.M. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Assam, have submitted that in many cases, it has been found that the disability condition varies from that mentioned in the certificates and hence, this exercise. 5. By producing a copy of the Office Memorandum dated 21/05/2022 issued by the Government of Assam, Department of Personal, Dispur, more particularly, clause- 5 of the OM, Mr. Goswami further submits that it is permissible under the law to subject the candidates for verification/reassessment of their disability through a competent mechanism and hence, this exercise. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that although all the petitioners are holding Disability Certificates which project them as candidates suffering from “bench mark” disability, yet, it appears that as per the opinion of the specially constituted Medical Board, the disability of the writ petitioners have been found to be less than the “Bench Mark” criteria of 40% disability. There may be cases where the extent of disability of some of the candidates have undergone changes since the issuance of their Disability Certificates or there was some error in Page No.# 6/6 assessing their disability status either by the original authority issuing the Certificates or by the Specially Constituted Medical Board. However, the said aspect of the matter cannot be gone into by this Court unless the petitioners are communicated with the decision of the authorities in this regard, thereby, giving them an opportunity to assail such decision, on merit, if so advised. 7. As such, without expressing any opinion on the stand of the learned departmental counsel or the findings and observations of the Medical Board, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to communicate the decision of the authorities pertaining to the individual disability status vis-a-vis their claim for appointment of each of the writ petitioners against the posts applied for, in writing, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. Liberty is granted to the writ petitioners to assail the decision of the Medical Board and/or Department of Social Justice and Empowerment, by filing fresh writ petitions, if so advised. 8. Writ petition stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant