WP/35657/2026 of D.Parvesh Raj Vs Union of India on 16 October 2026

1. Union of lndia, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi.

2. The Medical counserring committee, Through its Director, Directorate General of Health Services, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi_

3. The National Board of Examination, through its Director, Medical Enclave, Ansari Nagar, Ring Road, New Delhi.

4. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Chief Secretary, Health, Medical and Family welfare, Secretariat, Hyderabad

5. The State of Telangana, Represented by its principal Secretary, Health, Medical and Family welfare, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

6. M/1 Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences (KNRUHS), Rep. by its Registrar, Warangal, Telangana State. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus Directing Set-Asiding the proceedings of Lr.No.ggBg/MBBS & BDS/KNRUHS/ADMISSIONS12026-27, DATED: 9-10-2026 issued by the Respondent No.6 and direct the Respondent No-6 to Re-Examine the petitioner and shall assess the Disability of the petitioner afresh by assigning Valid and cogent Reasons and to consider the petitioner vide Roll No 4219104109, Application No. 26041019S036, NEET ALL INDIA RANK-916121, under the PwDB Disability in accordance with the Rules of National Medical Commission. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R.RAMA KRISHNA, REP. M/s. JMS LAw FIRM Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: Ms. L.PRANATHI REDDY, SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT., Counsel for the Respondent No.4 & 5: SRI A.SUDERSHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI T.SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUHS The Court made the following: ORDER

- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION No.35657 OF 2026 (CNR No. HBHC0I 07 I 580202) Dated: 16.10.2026 Between D. Parvesh Raj S/o.J. Darma Raj . . . Petitioner AND Union ol lndia, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi and 5 others. ..Resfondents ORDER: @er the Hon'ble the Acring Chief Jusrice P.Sam Koslryl Heard Sri R. Rama Krishna, learned counsel representing M/s.JMS Law Firm, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioncr, Ms. L.Pranathi Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.l to 3 and Sri A. Sudershan Reddy, leamed Advocate Gcneral appearing for the State and Mr. T. Sharath, learned Standing Counsel for the Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, appearing tbr respondent No.6.

E

2. The petitioner in the present writ petition is aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2026 passed by respondent No.6 University, r,,hereby the request fbr considering the case of the petitioner under the Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (pwBD) category was refused. Thc impugned order dated 09.10.2026 seems to have been the one which has been passed pursuant to an order d,ated 23.09.2026 passed by the Division Bench of this Courr in W.P.No.32010 of 2026. The said rvrit petition got disposed of with the foltowing obseri, ations: "l,earned Standing Counsel fbr respondent No.6-University submits that in case the petitioner submits a representation, the same shall be dealt rvith by respondent No.6-University in accordance rvith Iaw. In l ie* ol' the albresaid submissions. the Writ Petition is disposed of tith libenv to the petitiouer to submit a representation to respondent \o.6-University r,",ith rcgard to his grievance. In case, such a representatiorl is made. respondent No.6-Unirersity shall decide the same. in accordance rvith larv. and pass a reasonecl order before the ncxt counselling. It is madc clear that this Courl has not expressed anv opinion on the merits of the case.''

3. l-earncd counsel fbr the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a disabilitv certificate dated 25.08.2026 issued by the Niloufer Hospital, Hyderabad, which is enclosed along with the writ petition as Annexure Pl l, showing hirn to be the person under pwBD category, suffering with more tban 40%o disabiiity. According to the learned t---

counsel for the petitioner, inspite of all these relevant documents being produced, the petitioner has not been permitted to participate in 4ny of the counsellings, which according him is highly arbitrary and also bad in the eye of law

4. Leamed Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 University, however, submits that there is a policy decision which the University had already taken way back in the year 2017 when G.O.Ms.No.114, Health, Medical & Family Welfare (C1) Department, dated 05.07.2017, was issued wherein it has been held that the decision of the competent Medical Board has been flnal insofar as assessment of disability is concemed and the petitioner in the instant case, therefore, does not fall within the said category wherein he claimed any benefit.

5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been examined at all by the Medical Board nor has he been considered to be a candidate under PwBD category and his candidature has been rejected.

- .+

6. Be that as it ma1,. considering the fact that the petitioner claims hirnself to be a Person suffering from Benchmark Disability and he relies upon a certificate dated 25.08.2026 issued by the Niloufer Hospital, H-vderabad, reflecting the disability to be more than 4Oyo and rhe l)ivision Bench of this Court already having passed an order dated 23.09.2026 in WP No.32010 ol 2026 in the case of the petitioner directing thc University to consider his case. In all fairness, according to the Bench, the respondent authorities, considering the physical challenge that the petitioner is suffering from, ought have been considered the case of the petitioner sympatheticatly and he should have been subjected to assessment of the disability by the concerned Medical Board and thereafter ought to have been taken a decision as to whether he desen,es an admission or not. In the absence of which, rejection of the representation made by the petitioner vide order dated 09. 10.2026 seems to be in a mechanical manner without serious application of mind which, therefore, deserves to be interdicted -

7 . Leamed counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 University submits that the third round ofcounselling and the conversions are all in the process and are at the final stage.

8. ln the said circumstances, we direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to the counselling and he be considered against any of the existing vacancies or left over vacancies under the PwBD category, which may still arise or which is still vacant, if required the petitioner may also be subjected to fresh assessment by the relevant Medical Board so as to ascertain the percentage of disability.

9. With the aforesaid directions. the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous applications, if any pendin{. shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// Sd/.MOHD OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi, Union of lndia.

2. The Director, Medicar counseling committee, Directorate Generar of Hearth Services, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi.

3. The Director, Nationar Board of Examination, Medicar Encrave, Ansari Nagar, Ring Road, New Delhi.

4. The Chief Secretary, Health, Medical and Family welfare, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. 5 The Principal Secretary, Health, Medical and Family welfare, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

6. The Registrar, Kaloji Narayana Rao university of Hearth Sciences (KNRUHS), Warangal, Telangana State.

7. One CC to Mis. JMS LAW FIRI\,4, Advocate [OpUC] 8, One CC to SRt T.SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUHS tOpUCl

9. One CC to Ms L.PRANATHI REDDY, SC FOR CENTRAL GOW., tOpUCl ,10'ONE CC tO SRI N BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA, High Court for the State of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OpUCl'-

- '- ' 1'1 .Two CCs to ADVOCATE GENERAL, High court for the State of rerangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

12. Two CD Copies BSR

HIGH COURT HAC, J & SCR, J DATED: 161102026

ORDER

WP.No.35657 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS CC TODAY (r:A e A T S e

( 16 ocl zuffi C) o r_) * , , 0\