IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 14728 of 2011. [O&M] Date of Decision: 02nd December, 2011. Ricky Jain Petitioner through Ms. Divya Sharma, Advocate Versus Panjab University, Chandigarh & Ors. Respondents through Mr. Anupam Gupta, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioner applied for admission to Bachelor of Laws [Professional Course], to Panjab University, Chandigarh in the reserved category of Physically Challenged Persons. The petitioner appeared in the Entrance Test as a candidate belonging to aforementioned reserved category and as per his ranking, was entitled to be admitted to the subject Course. The petitioner however was denied admission on the ground that the nature of disability suffered by him was 'temporary' and curable. In other words, the respondents viewed that the disability of permanent in nature only entitles a candidate to seek the benefit of reservation. The aggrieved petitioner has approached this Court. The respondents have filed their reply/affidavit reiterating their plea. In order to ascertain the correct information regarding nature or percentage of disability suffered by the petitioner, he was vide order dated 17.10.2011 directed to appear before a Medical Board comprising three Experts of the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, with a further direction to submit the report of the Medical Board in a sealed cover. The PGIMER, Chandigarh has sent its report vide forwarding letter dated 25.11.2011 and it reads as follows:- “Dr. Aditya Aggarwal, Dr. Bhavuk Garg and Dr. Sharad Prabhakar examined the patient Mr. Ricky Jain on 21st November, 2011. Clinically left knee was found to be grossly unstable with quadriceps atrophy. He was found to be suffering from Internal Derangement of knee with MCL, ACL and PCL injury. X-rays and MRI depicted degenerative changes with ACL and PCL tear. This can be treated by surgical reconstruction. He was found to be having a total of 40% temporary disability”. It is true that the petitioner's 40% disability has been found to be of 'temporary' nature, endorsing the medical opinion already given by the Chief Medical Officer of the University. It may, however, be seen from the report that according to the Medical Board “this can be treated by surgical reconstruction”. It necessarily implies that the nature of disability suffered by the petitioner is not ordinarily curable with the passage of time or at its own. 'Surgical reconstruction' involves several risk factors including success rate, side effects, financial constraints etc. Unless the petitioner undergoes surgical reconstruction, the disability suffered by him is bound to persist which is obviously 'quasi-permanent' in nature. If that be so, it will be far fetched to draw any distinction between the disability of the present nature on the one hand or the 'permanent disability' on the other. Taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves to be admitted in the subject course against a seat reserved for the Physical Handicapped category. For the reasons aforementioned, the writ petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be admitted to the Bachelor of Laws [Professional] Three Year Course within one week. The rest of the issues shall be decided by the Departmental Authorities as per their Rules and Regulations. Disposed of. Dasti. December 02, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE