'Who knows, someday she may become an excellent doctor'
SC on admission to girl with disability in MBBS course
New Delhi, Feb 10: "Who knows, someday she may become an excellent doctor," the Supreme Court said on Friday as it came to the rescue of a girl, who was denied admission in MBBS course due to her language and speech impairment, and directed a medical board of PGIMER Chandigarh to examine her.
A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala directed that the medical board be constituted by the director of PGIMER Chandigarh, including a specialist on language and speech impairment to examine the girl, who is from Haryana.
The bench also directed that a report be filed by the medical board in the court after examining her in a month.
Advocate Gaurav Sharma, appearing for the National Medical Commission, suggested that it is not coming in the way of girl's education in MBBS course but it would be appropriate if she is examined by a medical board to ascertain, whether she will be able to cope up with the course.
He said that admission for this academic year has already been done but she can take admission for next academic year.
The bench then noted, "the petitioner has approached this court that she has been denied admission in MBBS course on the ground that she has speech and language impairment of 55 per cent. Without embarking on legal norms to find a resolution, we accordingly direct that the petitioner be examined by a medical board at PGIMER Chandigarh. The medical boards file its report within a month after examining her."
Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, appearing for the girl, said there was no challenge to the Medical Council of India Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 as amended on February 4, 2019.
The top court had issued notice on September 26, last year and sought response from the Centre and the National Medical Commission on the plea.
Agrawal had earlier submitted that the student, despite clearing NEET examination, is being denied her right to education as she has speech impairment.
He had said that her disability is qualified under the new regulations and she can be accommodated in the reserved quota.
The bench had then observed that had the petitioner come early, then the court could have exercised its power under Article 142 to protect the girl and her academic year could have been saved.
In her plea, the girl has said, "The petitioner, despite being a disabled person and suffering from disability, dreamt of pursuing MBBS and becoming a doctor. The petitioner was allotted a seat in the Kalpana Chawla Government Medical College, Haryana under the Person with disability category through counseling".
The plea said, however, she was declared ineligible after the disability board decided her disability is at 55 per cent.
Under the Disability Act, 40 per cent disability is allowed for taking the benefit of the reservation under the Act.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
K’taka HC judge whose controversial remarks triggered controversy expresses regret before open court
Bengaluru: Karnataka High Court judge, Justice V Srishananda, on Saturday expressed regret in open court after facing backlash over his controversial remarks in his recent court hearings, reported Bar and Bench.
Two purported video clips from Justice V Srishananda’s court hearing that show him making inappropriate comments went viral across social media platforms.
On Saturday, Justice Srishananda invited members of the Advocates Association, Bengaluru, and senior lawyers to his courtroom at 2:30 PM, where he read out a note expressing regret for inappropriate comments.
Quoting Advocates Association President Vivek Subba Reddy, Bar and Bench wrote, “He expressed regret for the comments and clarified that it was not his intention to offend any community or members of the Bar. He also requested the association to relay this message to all members of the Bar.”
Reddy further stated, “We also advised him to encourage young lawyers in the courtroom and refrain from making any irrelevant remarks during hearings.”
Another senior lawyer present during the session confirmed to the legal news portal that Justice Srishananda also addressed comments directed at a woman lawyer, who was seen in one of the videos being reprimanded by the judge. The judge Justice Srishananda clarified that his remarks were not intended to target her (woman lawyer) specifically, but rather pertained to the appellant she was representing. “He explained that his comment was meant to imply that the appellant seemed to know a lot about the other party,” said the lawyer.
In addition, Justice Srishananda assured those present that he would avoid making such comments in the future.
The controversy came to light on September 19, when a video clip from an August 28 Court hearing surfaced on social media, showing Justice Srishananda referring to a Muslim-majority sub-locality in Bengaluru’s Goripalya as "Pakistan." Hours later, another video from the same courtroom emerged, in which the judge was seen making a gender-insensitive remark.
Following outrage over the viral videos, a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, along with Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Hrishikesh Roy, on September 20 took a suo motu cognizance and sought a report from the Karnataka High Court Registrar General in connection with the viral video.
