IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13600 of 2010 GAURAV KUMAR S/O SHRI YOGENDRA PRASAD R/O VILL.- KATAR, P.O. & P.S.- HASAN BAZAR, DISTT.- BHOJPUR AT ARA ………….Petitioner Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH IT'S SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 2. THE DIRECTOR, VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NAGPUR 3. THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI 4. THE CENTRE INCHARGE, COUNSELING CENTRE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PATNA -----------Respondents 02.. 4.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Union of India. The petitioner claims to hold an Identity Card-cum-disability certificate issued by the State Commissioner for the disabled, Bihar, Patna under the Department of Social Welfare (Directorate of Social Welfare) in the pen of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Bhojpur, Ara, that his visual disability was to the extent of 40%. The petitioner qualified for admission to the National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli on basis of disability certificate. He was asked to appear before the Medical Board at the N.I.T. Patna. One of the members was stated to be an eye specialist. The Board has certified his visual disability as 30%. The petitioner contends that his admission is at stake 2 because of the variance in the two medical reports. It is emphasized that both the reports are of government sources. Learned counsel, for the Union of India, prays for time to seek instructions and file counter affidavit. The Court does not consider the same necessary at this stage. The visual disability certificate by the Medical Board at NIT Patna, apparently contains correction and over writing in the figure of his percentage of disability. This Court is satisfied that the same is sufficient not to give it full credibility. If that was not enough, the Court accepts the submission of the petitioner that his disability certificate issued by the Commissioner for the disabled, as assessed by the Medical Board at the time of counselling, both pertain to certification of a government authority. The Centre Incharge, Counselling Centre, N.I.T., Patna, Respondent No.4 is directed to have a fresh Medical Board constituted of at least three government Ophthalmologists who shall assess the visual disability of the petitioner and certify the same. Let this be done by respondent no.4 within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt 3 /presentation of a copy of this order before it. Needless to state that the further relief for admission shall naturally remain dependent upon the same. The application stands disposed of. Amit ( Navin Sinha, J.)