The Kerala High Court held that the different quantum of reservation for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) and Persons with Disability (PWD) in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) do not violate their right to equality. .Justice N Nagaresh held so while dismissing a petition challenging the quota for PWD, noting that PWDs form a homogenous class by themselves and the law enables them to be treated separately, which erases any question of violations of Article 14."There is no violation of Article 14, as Article 14 postulates equal treatment for equally placed persons that is to say unequals can be treated unequally. To be more precise, differential treatment is permissible when it comes to unequals. Persons claiming social reservation fall in one compartment and persons with disabilities who are included in the quota fall on a different distinct compartment so there arises no question of violation of Article 14 of the Constitution," the Court held..The Court, therefore, stated that the State is empowered to provide two channels of admission as the classifications are rational and aimed at achieving a laudable objective."The Sate can provide for separate and exclusive channels of entry or sources of admission the validity whereof cannot be determined on the constitutional principles applicable to communal reservations. Such two channels of entry or two sources of admission are valid provisions, when the classification is based on an intelligible differentia with a laudable object sought to be achieved"..The Court passed the judgement on a petition moved by candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste communities, who appeared in the NEET 2021 for admission to medical courses in Kerala. As per the prospectus and various Government Orders, 10 per cent of the seats in government medical colleges are reserved for SC/ST candidates.However, in Clause 4.1.5 of the Prospectus, the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations imposed a condition that SC/ST candidates shall be allotted seats after leaving the seats set apart for the All-India quota, Government of India Nominees, Special reservations, Persons with Disabilities, all types of supernumerary seats sanctioned, and management quota.The petitioners contended that the two classes entitled for reservation are discriminated among them and such adoption of criteria lead to a marginal decrease in the available seats for SC/ST candidates. They, therefore, sought quashing of the said clause. .The Commissioner of Examinations countered by stating that the enabling provisions contained in the Constitution enable the State to make any special provisions by law for the advancement of socially and economically backward citizens, or for the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in the matter of admission to educational institutions. In the given context, persons with disabilities form a distinct and homogenous class and the quota reserving seats to persons having disabilities in the educational institutions are absolutely valid, it was argued..These arguments found favour with the Court, which referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in K Duraisamy v. State of Tamil Nadu in which it was held that "the Government possess the right and authority to decide from what sources the admissions in educational institutions or to particular disciplines and courses therein have to be made and that too in what proportion"..The Court opined that the State can identify classes of persons who are having distinct characteristics or disadvantages and treat them separately under law. "Persons having disability form a homogenous class by themselves where disability is not on the basis of social backwardness but on the basis of physical disability. It is relevant to point out that the claim of the petitioners for reservation is traceable to Article 15 which is an enabling right, the claim of the PWD persons traces to a statute promulgated for the purpose of implementation of a Constitutional mandate. Therefore, it is by virtue of the statute, persons with disability are treated as a homogenous class irrespective of social classification," the single-judge said.The Court, therefore, dismissed the petition.Advocates K Siju, S Abhilash and Anjana Kannath represented the petitioners. Government Pleader PG Pramod and advocate Titus Mani represented the respondents.