Persons with disability also have right to higher education: Kerala High Court allows student with cerebral palsy to pursue MBBS [Read Judgment]

Persons with disability also have the right, not only to basic education but also higher education just like any other citizen, observed the Kerala High Court recently while coming to the aid of a woman with cerebral palsy who had been denied MBBS admission (Ashwathy P v. Union of India and ors). .Pertinently, when it comes to admission to educational institutions, especially against the quota earmarked for persons with a disability, the High Court highlighted that what is to be considered is if the candidate is in a position to perform the essential functions of the course. .If they clear this threshold, admission cannot be denied to persons with disabilities, Justice PB Suresh Kumar said. He added that the authorities have an obligation to make the curriculum disabled-friendly to the extent possible. ."... if they are able to perform the essential functions of the course, admission shall not be denied to them on the ground of their disability. I may add in this context that if the curriculum of a particular course is not disabled friendly, it is the obligation of the authorities concerned to make the curriculum disabled friendly to the extent possible and to provide to the persons with disability necessary assistance having regard to the technological advancements in the field. In other words, the ultimate objective shall be that if a disabled person desires to pursue his studies in a particular field, and if he is capable and competent to do so, his disability shall not stand in the way of the said learning process," the Court ruled..If a disabled person desires to pursue his studies in a particular field, and if he is capable and competent to do so, his disability shall not stand in the way of the said learning process.Kerala High Court.Having found the petitioner-student in this case eligible to pursue the MBBS course, in terms of the Central Government's guidelines on admitting candidates with benchmark disabilities for medical courses, the Court made absolute an interim order earlier passed for her admission to a medical college at Manjeri. ."It is necessary to mention in the context of this case that like any other citizen, persons with disability have also the right to get not only the basic education but also higher education. Every person shall be presumed to be capable of learning, and denial of opportunity to pursue a course which one seeks to undertake on the ground of disability would amount to denial of opportunity to learn, and would be discriminatory", the Court added..Justice Kumar noted that persons with disabilities should be given opportunities for education so that they will be able to lead independent, economically productive and fully participatory lives. .The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 was introduced with this object, the Court observed. The 2016 Act requires that 5 percent seats of the sanctioned intake capacity in government and government aided institutions be filled up by candidates with benchmark disabilities..Further, the Judge emphasised that the State has an obligation to do all that is necessary to empower persons with disability and to foster their participation in all aspects of life. .The petitioner, in this case, was denied MBBS admission on the ground that her cerebral palsy and triplegia (paralysis of three limbs) conditions rendered her ineligible for MBBS admissions. The applicable rules allowed the admission of candidates suffering from cerebral palsy if the the disability was not more than 80 percent. The petitioner's cerebral palsy-associated disability was assessed at 63.3 percent. .However, the mention of her having triplegia in her certificate of disability led the authorities to view it as an independent condition falling under the general category of 'Locomotor Disability' under the applicable rules. A persons suffering from a locomotor disability is required to show that both their limbs are intact, with sensation and with sufficient strength and range of motion. Adjudged by these criteria, the petitioner was found to be ineligible for MBBS admission..The High Court, however, pointed out that the triplegia is not an independent condition suffered by the petitioner, but rather one that is associated with cerebral palsy. As such, she could not be denied admission citing the criteria associated with category of locomotor disability, the Court found. .On an application of other assessing methods, including the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) and the Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), the Court found that the petitioner was a person who can:climb stairs with railing, though she has only minimum ability to run or jump and difficulty with uneven surfaces or inclines.handle most objects with somewhat reduced quality and/or speed of achievement. ."According to me, it cannot be said that the petitioner suffers from any of the disqualifications mentioned in Appendix H-1 for persons suffering from Locomotor Disability like Amputation, Poliomyelitis etc," the judge concluded..Referring to the National Medical Commission's apprehensions over whether the petitioner would be able to perform the duties of a doctor, the Court also pointed out that not all candidates pursuing medical courses do so to become practicing doctors who are required to physically examine patients. Medical graduates may also opt for teaching, research etc., the Court remarked. ."That apart, it cannot be said that a person who is not able to physically examine a patient cannot be a doctor, for having regard to the technological advancements achieved in the field of medicine especially during the last couple of decades, there would be umpteen replacements for physical examination in the years to come," Justice Kumar added..Therefore, the Court allowed the writ petition, observing that denying the petitioner admission to a medical course would be per se arbitrary. .The petitioner was represented by Advocate Kaleeswaram Raj. Advocates Jaishankar V Nair and Titus Mani, Special Government Pleader V Manu and standing counsel for the National Testing Agency, Nirmal S, appeared for various respondents. .[Read Judgment]