{1} wp12178-26.doc drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.12178 OF 2026 Khadija Fatema Mohammed Iftequar Ahmed PETITIONER VERSUS Union of India and Others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. Mayur M. Subhedar, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondent - State Mr. S. W. Munde, Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 5 Mr. M. D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2 ....… [CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, & ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. J.] DATE : 30 th SEPTEMBER, 2026 ORDER : 1. By this Petition, the Petitioner challenges the medical assessment conducted by Respondent No. 3 – Medical Assessment Board and seeks declaration that the Petitioner is suffering from 60% disability, as per the disability certificate annexed at Exhibit-A. 2. It is the case of the Petitioner that, she is suffering from disability of low vision, since both her eyes are affected. A three Members’ Committee of Medical Board at Parbhani Civil Hospital has certified that, the Petitioner is 60% disabled. She appeared 2026:BHC-AUG:47098-DB {2} wp12178-26.doc for NEET 2026 examination and secured 407 marks. As per the merit list, she was allotted Parbhani Medical College and Hospital. 3. As per the procedure laid down by the Medical Council Committee, New Delhi, verification of the disability certificates of the candidates, who were supposed to be accommodated under the PwBD category, was to be done. The Petitioner was referred to Disability Board at AIMS Nagpur, which conducted preliminary assessment and held that the Petitioner is suffering from 30% disability. 4. The Petitioner approached Respondent No.3 Medical Assessment Board. Respondent No.3, instead of conducting tests of the Petitioner, referred her to a private hospital,namely Lotus Eye Hospital. According to the Petitioner, on the basis of the report of Lotus Eye Hospital, Respondent No.3 Medical Assessment Board opined that the Petitioner is suffering from 30% disability. The Petitioner challenged the said opinion by sending an e-mail to the Medical Council Committee, New Delhi. However, no cognizance of the Petitioner’s e-mail is taken. Hence, the Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: {3} wp12178-26.doc “B. By issuing a writ of mandamus or any other writ of like nature, the Medical Assessment of petitioner conducted by R-3 Medical Assessment Board be quashed and set aside and instead petitioner be declared as 60% disabled as per the Disability Certificate at Exh.A. C. By passing appropriate orders or directions, the Respondent No.3 Medical Assessment Board be directed to place on record the assessment of petitioner with regard to the medical assessment opinion 3 annexed at Exh.H. D. By issuing a writ of mandamus or any other writ of like nature, Respondent No.4 Government Medical College and Hospital may kindly be directed to grant provisional admission to the petitioner in MBBS course for academic year 2026-2027 as per merit OR By issuing an appropriate order or direction, one seat reserved for disabled candidate be kept vacant at R-4 Government Medical College and Hospital” 5. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner, learned Advocate for Respondents and learned AGP. Perused the record. 6. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner, by relying on the notification issued by the National Medical Commission, submitted that the Petitioner has no vision to her one eye and she has low vision to another eye. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner contends that only left eye of the Petitioner was examined, when her right eye had no light perception as is clear {4} wp12178-26.doc from Exhibit-E (page 63). The eligibility certificate is issued by the Medical Assessment Board, AIMS Nagpur. 7. Considering the contentions of the Petitioner, we had referred the Petitioner to Appellate Medical Board, situated at DGMC and Sir JJ Hospital, Mumbai with a direction to examine both the eyes of the Petitioner and to give report on or before 25th September, 2026. The Petitioner was directed to appear before the Medical Assessment Board, at JJ Hospital, Mumbai. 8. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the Appellate Medical Board examined the Petitioner and has issued following certificate : “The candidate was reassessed by the Appellate Disability Assessment Board with reference to the detailed findings of the Primary Board and the relevant medical records / investigations reports submitted by the candidate. The assessment has been undertaken as per the DEPwD Guidelines for assessing the extent of Specified Disabilities, March 2024. Disability / Medical Condition : (RE) MILROOPHTHALMOS C̄ CORONEAL OPACITY (LE) NEBULAR CORNEAL OPACITY C̄ FINE NYSTAGMUS C̄ REFRACTIVE ERROR Disability percentage assessed by Appellate Board (In case of discrepancies between UDID & primary Board report) : 30%” {5} wp12178-26.doc 9. In the light of above certificate, the Petitioner does not fulfill the criteria of benchmark disability. In this view of the matter, we find no merit in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. [ ABASAHEB D. SHINDE ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ] JUDGE JUDGE drp/wp12178-26.doc