PRANAY KUMAR PODDER versus STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2017] 2 S.C.R. 797 · Decided: 23-03-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 2 S.C.R. 797 
PRANAY KUMAR PODDER 
v. 
STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 4393 of2017) 
MARCH 23, 2017 
[DIPAK MISRA AND A. M. KHANWILKAR, JJ.] 
Education/Educational institutions - Admission to medical 
college - Students declared ineligible to take admission to MBBS 
course on the score that they suffered partial colour blindness -
Question for consideration before this court is whether Medical 
Council of India can debar the candidates suffering from CVD to 
undertake medical courses on the basis of decision taken by the 
General Body - Thi.s Court directed MedicaL Council of India to 
constitute Expert .Committee that shall include the representatives 
of the 
Medical Council of India, experts from genetics, 
ophthalmology, psychiatry and medical education - The Committee 
would review the situation and take note of prevalent conditions of 
study and practice and suggest changes for adoption in the medical 
course keeping in view the international practices - Expert 
Committee shall also concentrate on diagnostic test for progress 
and review of the disorder and the available prosthetics· aids to 
assist CVD medical practitioner - Thereafter. Committee shall submit 
the report before this Court - Matter listed for farther hearing on 
I 1'" July 2017 - Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, 
Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - Rights of 
Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. 
Union of India v. Devendra Kumar Pand and Ors. 
(2009) 14 SCC 546 : (2009( 11 SCR 1; Union of India 
v. Sanjay Kumar (2004) 6 SCC 708 : [2004) 3 Suppl. 
SCR 463; Kuna/ Singh v. Union cif India (2003) 4 SCC 
524 : [2003) 1 SCR 1059; Justice Sunanda Bhandare 
Foundation v. Union of India and Anr. (2014) 14 SCC 
383 : (2014) 4 SCR 113 - distinguished. 
Dr. Kuna/ Kumar v. Union of India and Ors. 101 (2002) 
DLT 471; Rajasthan High Court in Parmesh Pachar v. 
Convener, Central RLW 2003 (4) Raj 2284 - referred 
to. 
797 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
798 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2017] 2 S.C.R. 
Case Law Reference 
101 (2002) DLT 471 
referred to 
Para8 
RLW 2003 (4) Ra.i 2284 
referred to 
Para8 
[2009] 11 SCR 1 
distinguished 
Para 27 
[2004] 3 Suppl. SCR 463 
distinguished 
Para 27 
120031 1 SCR 1059 
distinguished 
Para 27 
f2014J 4 SCR 113 
distinguished 
Para 28 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4393 of 
2017 
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.08.2015 of the High Court 
ofTripura, Aga1tala in W. P. (C) No. 244 of 2015 
WITH 
C. A. No. 4394 of2017. 
K. V. Vishwanathan (A.C.), Vikas Singh, Sr. Advs., Shoeb 
Alam, Mehul M. Gupta, Abhishek Kaushik, Dhananjay Bhaskar Ray, 
Ravi Raghunath, Siddhant Boxy, Mukunda Rao, K. V. Mohan, 
Chandra Prakash, Rituraj Biswas, Sujaya Bardhan, Gaurav Sharma, 
Ms.Amandeep Kaur, Prateek Bhatia, Dhawal Mohan, Ms. Vara Gaur, 
Ms. Deepika Kalia, Shivam Singh, Gopal Singh, Ad vs. ·for the appearing 
parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DIPAK MISRA, J. I. Leave granted. 
2. The appellants, after crossing two scores and one, nurtured the 
ambition, which is quite a usual feature to human nature unless the innate 
nature is distracted by Some kind of aberration, to prosecute medical 
education and for the said purpose they appeared in the examination and 
obtained the requisite marks to be selected. At that stage, the old saying 
"the proposals conceived in mind are not always concretized" or the 
beginning does not achieve the end or for many a reason, as it appears, 
took the principal seat and the two students were declared to be ineligible 
to take admission to MBBS course at the stage of counselling held on 
23'd June, 2015 on the score that they suffered partial colour blindness. 
In such a situation, the appellants being determined and affirmatively 
PRANAY KUMAR PODDER v. STATE OF TRIPURA AND 
OTHERS [DIPAK MISRA, J.] 
obstinate not to abandon their pursuit, approached the High Court of 
Tripura at Agartala in W.P.(C) Nos.244 and 252 of 20i 5 seeking relief 
that the declaration of ineligibility by the concerned Committee was 
absolutely indefensible and legally impermissive. The submission of the 
appellants was built on .the foundation that there were no regulations 
framed by the Medical Council oflndia under the Indian Medical Council 
Act, 1956, debarring the likes from admission, for in the absence of a 
regulation, neither any instruction nor resolution of the MCI could throttle 
the right to appear. 
3. The s
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.