IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2008 / 11TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 24194 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MUHAMMED SUBAIR.T S/O. KUNHIMONAMMED, THOTTATHIL HOSE CHERUKARA P.O.,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT ,DISTRICT HOSPITAL MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 24194 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 2nd September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a candidate aspiring for admission to the MBBS course this year in the quota set apart for persons with disabilities. The petitioner has been included in the list of persons with disabilities eligible for consideration for admission. However, he was given admission only to B. Pham course, whereas the petitioner insists on admission to MBBS course and according to the petitioner in accordance with the rank obtained by him, he is entitled to such admission. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i. Call for the records leading to Ext. P8, letter issued by the first respondent and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction; ii. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the first respondent that give admission to the MBBS Degree course under the Quota for persons with disabilities.” 2. The contention of the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent is that the petitioner was examined by three different Medical Boards consisting of expert doctors on various fields, who had certified that the petitioner is not fit for undergoing a course in MBBS because of his physical disability. Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the petitioner's incapacity is in his ability for communication and he can, although with difficulty, communicate with other people. Counsel therefore would submit that the petitioner cannot be disqualified on that ground. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. A copy of the medical inspection report by the expert doctors has been made available to me by the learned Government Pleader for perusal. The same reads thus: “Suitable only for B. Pharm. Since he has got severe communicative disability, he is not suitable for all medical courses (MBBS, BDS). Doctor-patient W.P.C. No. 24194/08. -: 2 :- communication is a must. So he won't be able to attend the clinical postings. Hence he is not suitable for medical courses.” 5. I am not an expert on the subject. Experts in the field have certified as above. I cannot come to a different conclusion on the basis of the averments in the writ petition. It is general knowledge that MBBS consists of examinations wherein the student is expected to communicate with the patient, obtain information regarding the disease of the patient and communicate the same to the examiner as a test of proficiency in diagnosis. The student is also expected to prepare the case history of the patient. All these would be possible only if the petitioner is able to communicate effectively with the patient as well as the examiner. When the expert team of doctors certify that the petitioner would not be able to communicate with the patient appropriately, I cannot hold otherwise. That being so, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.