CHAIRMAN, ODISHA JOINT ENTRANCE EXAMINATION versus JASOBANTA NAYAK AND OTHERS

Citation: [2016] 1 S.C.R. 593 · Decided: 18-01-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA, N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2016] 1 S.C.R. 593 
CHAIRMAN, ODISHA JOINT ENTRANCE EXAMINATION 
A 
v. 
JASOBANTA NAYAK AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 288-289 of2016) 
JANUARY 18,2016 
[DIPAK MISRA AND N.V. RAMANA, JJ.] 
Education/Educational institution - Admission to engineering 
course - State Joint Entrance Examination - Respondent no. I placed 
at serial no. 16871 in the general category and at no. 80 under 
physically challenged category for admission - Challenge to, before 
the High Court- Pursuant to the direction by High Court, respondent 
no. I filed physically handicapped certificate granted by District 
Hospital which stated that he was 40% visually disabled - High 
Court declared the disability of respondent no.I at 40% and issued 
direction to consider his case in the category of physically 
handicapped persons - Interference with - Held: Percentage of 
disability was to be determined by the Medical Board, which was 
specifically mentioned in the prospectus - Medical Board was 
constituted as per the norms of prospectus and it clearly assessed 
the disability of vision of respondent no. I at 20% and issued the 
certificate - Certificate granted by the District Hospital was 40% 
and on basis thereof, the High Court declared the disability of 
respondent no. I at 40% and to consider his case in the category of 
physically handicapped persons - Court cannot assess the 
percentage of disability - Thus, the High Court was not justified in 
interfering with the selection process in exercise of writ jurisdiction 
- Order passed by the High Court set aside. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 288-
289 of2016 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.10.2012 of the High Court 
of Orissa at Cuttack in W.P. (C) No. 14456/2012 with Misc. Case No. 
12732 of2012. 
Milind Kumar for appellant. 
Nidhi for the Respondents. 
593 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
594 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] I S.C.R. 
A 
The following order of the Court was delivered 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
ORDER 
I. Leave granted. 
2. 
The present appeals are directed by way of special leave 
petitions against the judgement and order dated 
l 7'h October, 2012, 
passed in W.P.(C) No.14456 of 2012, by the High Court of Orissa at 
Cuttack. 
3. The respondent No. I herein had appeared in the Odisha Joint 
Entrance Examination 2012 for admission into engineering course. He 
was assigned the rank at SI. No.16871 in the general category and placed 
at No.80 under the physically challenged category for admission into the 
engineering course. As the respondent No. I was physically handicapped, 
he had filed a certificate issued from the District Head Quarters Hospital, 
Balasore, Odisha, which had mentioned that he was visually disabled by 
40%. Needless to say, visual 40% disability enables a candidate to be 
considered in the physically handicapped category. 
4. It is submitted by Mr. Mil ind Kumar, learned counsel appearing 
for the appellant that the order passed by the High Court suffers from 
grave illegality inasmuch as it has observed that the respondent No. I 
was directed to produce the physically handicapped certificate, though 
the prospectus clearly prohibits for filing of such certificate. It is urged 
by him that the Board that was constituted as per the stipulations 
prescribed in the prospectus, had found that the ~espondent No. I had 
20% vi1sual disability and not 40% and, in such a case, the High Court 
should not have placed reliance on the certificate issued by the District 
Head Quarters Hospital, Balasore, by opining that there is no reason to 
disbelieve the same. 
5. Ms. Nidhi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. I, 
has supported the order passed by the High Court. 
6. To appreciate the controversy, we may with profit refer to 
G 
Clause 2.1.4. of the prospectus, which reads as follows: 
"2.1.4. 
3% of seats are reserved for Physically Challenged 
candidates for admission to B. Tech/B. Arch I MBA I MCA I 
PGDM I PGCM I PGDM (Exe) I B. Pharm courses. the 
candidates with 40% disabilities in consonance with section -39 
H 
of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection 
CHAIRMAN, ODISHA JOINT ENTRANCE EXAMINATION v. 
595 
JASOBANTA NAYAK 
of Rights and Full participation) Act, 1995, are eligible to be 
A 
considered under Physically Challenged Category for admission 
to B. Tech I B. Arch I MBA I PGDM I PGCM I PGDM (Exe) I 
B. Pharm courses. 
3% of total MBBS and BOS seats are reserved for persons 
with disabilities and they have to meet the m

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.