1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.3028/2009 (Akshay J. Jaybhaye .vs. State of Mah. And others. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. D.G. Patil, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. A.D. Sonak, AGP for Respondents 1 to 3. .......... CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 20, 2009 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the action of respondents no.1 and 2 by which the respondents have refused admission in Health Science Course in the category of Physically Handicapped quota. 3. Reply filed on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2 discloses that the petitioner has been refused admission on two grounds. The petitioner is having permanent locomotory disability of 86 % and he is not able to maintain erect posture. According to the respondents, in terms of the guidelines formulated by the Medical Council of India, in order to be eligible for admission in the category of physically handicapped quota for Health Sciences Course, the disability should not exceed more than 70 %. The certificate produced by the respondents discloses that Special Medical Board assessed the disability of 86 % and the petitioner is not able to maintain erect posture. Therefore, in terms of 2 the guidelines framed by the Medical Council of India, the petitioner has been held not eligible for admission to Health Science Course. 4. According to Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, the certificate issued in his favour by the Doctor disclosed that he is in position to maintain erect posture and his disability is less than 70 %. 5. Having considered the rival submissions and having perused the record, we find no merit in the present petition. We have absolutely no reason to disbelieve the certificate issued by the Special Medical Board which discloses that the petitioner is having disability of 86 % and he is not in a position to maintain erect posture. This being the position, the action of respondents no.1 and 2 in holding the petitioner not eligible for admission to Health Science Course cannot be faulted. We find no ground to interfere with the decision taken by respondents no.1 and 2. The same needs no interference in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and hence the writ petition is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE halwai