Bombay High Court
KUSH SAURABH DATARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRU SECRETARY AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
A post‑merit‑list disability certificate does not entitle the petitioner to be inserted into the final CAP merit list or to participate in CAP Round III, and the petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, a candidate for first‑year engineering admission, obtained a disability certificate showing a learning disability of at least 40% on 13 August 2026, after the Centralized Admission Process (CAP) final merit list had been published on 27 July 2026. He sought a writ directing the State CET Cell to consider his application for CAP Round III under the PwD category, arguing that reasonable accommodation under Supreme Court precedent should apply. The respondents contended that inclusion in the final merit list is a prerequisite for participation in any CAP round, citing Rule 9(2) of the CAP information brochure, and that the petitioner’s certificate was issued too late to affect the merit list. The Court agreed with the respondents, holding that a post‑merit‑list disability certificate cannot retrospectively insert a candidate into the list or revive the CAP registration process. Consequently, the petitioner was directed to pursue admission through the non‑CAP institutional round, and the writ petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether a candidate who obtains a PwD certificate after the publication of the final CAP merit list can be admitted to CAP Round III under the PwD category.
- Whether the CET Cell is obligated to consider a belated PwD application despite the candidate’s absence from the merit list.
- Whether the principle of reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities extends to retrospective inclusion in a merit‑based admission process.
Subjects
- Persons with Disabilities
- Reasonable accommodation
- Centralized Admission Process
- Merit list
- Technical education admission
- Maharashtra State CET
- Disability certificate
- Admission rules
Judgment
1 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10917 OF 2026
Kush Saurabh Datar ...Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra through
Principal Secretary and Another ...Respondents
-----------------
Mr. Parth P. Deshpande, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Kedar B. Dige, Addl.G.P. a/w. Ms. Priyanka B. Chavan, AGP, for the
Respondent / State.
Dr. Dhruti Kapadia a/w. Ms. Kavita Dhanuka, for Respondent No.2 / CET
Cell.
-----------------
Digitally
signed by
CORAM : R. I. CHAGLA AND
MAMTA
MAMTA AMAR
AMAR KALE
KALE Date:
2026.08.31
15:54:11
+0530
FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.
DATED : 28th AUGUST, 2026
P.C.:-
1. This Petition has sought for direction to Respondent Nos.1 and
2 to consider the Petitioner as a person with Benchmark Disability / PwD
candidate for the purpose of admission to First Year Undergraduate
Technical Courses in Engineering and Technology for the Academic Year
2026-2027, on the basis of the Disability Certificate dated 13th August 2026.
2. When the Petition was filed on 20 th August 2026, the CAP
Mamta Kale 1/7
2 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
Round process was underway and in fact it had reached CAP Round III
stage and that is the reason for the Petitioner to seek a direction to
Respondent No.2 to accept and process the Petitioner’s representation dated
18th August 2026 and to consider his candidature for CAP Round III under
the PwD / PwBD category.
3. The Petitioner had admittedly made an Application on 18 th
August 2026 by placing reliance upon a temporary certificate for education
purpose which showed the Petitioner having Learning Disability (Dyslexia
and Dysgraphia) not less than 40%. He had accordingly sought for
permission to participate in CAP Round III, including option submission,
allotment and reporting, under the PwD / PwBD category on that basis.
4. The Petitioner, at the time of making of the Application, was
well aware of the fact that the CAP Rounds have already commenced and
that the final merit list had also been published on 27 th July 2026. Even
then he chose not to apply under the PwD category prior to the final merit
list.
5. The Petitioner’s Application was initially made on 2 nd July
2026. The Petitioner completed the online registration and uploaded the
requisite documents for admission through CAP for the said course for the
Academic Year 2026–2027 during the period from 2nd July 2026 to 19th July
2026. It is an admitted fact that, at that stage, the Petitioner did not possess
a Disability Certificate and, hence, the document scrutiny of the Petitioner’s
Mamta Kale 2/7
3 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
CAP Application which had been undertaken on 20 th July 2026 in PwD /
PwBD category could not be completed. The Petitioner having not been
successful in CAP Rounds I and II, and not having been allotted any seat
under the Open Category, as an after thought, sought to obtain the
Disability Certificate under the PwD / PwBD category.
6. The Application has not been responded by Respondent No.2
State CET Cell and being aggrieved thereby the present Writ Petition has
been filed.
7. Mr. Parth Deshpande, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner
submitted that the Disability Certificate having been obtained on 18 th
August 2026, showing the disability to the extent of not less than 40%,
ought to have been considered by Respondent No.2 State CET Cell, and the
Petitioner ought to have been permitted to apply under the PwD / PwBD
category for CAP Round III.
8. Mr. Deshpande further submitted that the Petitioner being a
person with disability (PwD) had to be given reasonable accommodation as
held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in several decisions. He has submitted
that, in the event the reliefs sought for are not granted, the Petitioner would
not be able to participate in the CAP Round under the PwD/PwBD category
and would be left with no option but to apply at the Institutional Level,
where admission would be at the discretion of the concerned Institution. He
has, accordingly, pressed for the reliefs sought for in the Petition to be
Mamta Kale 3/7
4 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
granted.
9. Ms. Dhruti Kapadia, the learned Counsel for Respondent No.2
CET Cell, has vehemently opposed the Petition and referred to the Affidavit-
in-Reply filed on behalf of Respondent No.2 dated 25 th August 2026. She
has, in particular, referred to paragraph 5 of the said Affidavit wherein it is
stated that the name of the Petitioner did not appear in the Provisional
Merit List published on 22 nd July 2026 by the CET Cell on its official portal.
Therefore, the name of the Petitioner also did not appear in the Final Merit
List published on 27th July 2026 by the CET Cell. She has further referred
to paragraph 6 of the said Affidavit wherein it is stated that inclusion of the
candidate’s name in the final CAP merit list is an essential requirement for
participation in the CAP process. Reference has been made to Rule 9(2) at
page 72 of the Information Brochure in that context.
10. Ms. Kapadia further submitted that the PWD Certificate relied
upon by the Petitioner was obtained after publication of the final merit list.
The subsequent obtaining of the PWD certificate cannot, by itself, have the
effect of retrospectively inserting the Petitioner’s name into the final CAP
merit list or reviving the CAP registration process, which the Petitioner had
failed to complete within the prescribed period. She submitted that the
registration for Non-CAP admissions is presently available up to 15 th
September 2026, and the Petitioner is entitled to participate in the
applicable Non-CAP / Institutional level / ACAP admission process subject
Mamta Kale 4/7
5 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
to the prescribed eligibility requirements, availability of seats and other
applicable conditions. Having considered the submissions, we find much
merit in the submissions of Ms. Dhruti Kapadia, the learned Counsel for
Respondent No.2 State CET Cell.
11. The admitted fact is that the Petitioner had obtained the PwD
Certificate after publication of the final merit list. The Petitioner’s name
also does not appear in the Provisional Merit List published on 22 nd July
2026 by Respondent No.2 State CET Cell on its official portal and
accordingly also did not appear in final merit list published on 27 th July
2026 by the State CET Cell.
12. Rule 9(2) at page 72 of the Information Brochure provides as
follows:
“Conduct of CAP Round-I - (a) The seats available for
Round-I shall be published on the website. The candidate
whose name is appeared in the final merit list of CAP shall
be eligible to participate in this round by filing online
option form. The candidate shall fill and confirm the
option form through candidate’s login.”
13. According to the aforesaid Rule, a candidate whose name
appeared in the final merit list of CAP shall be entitled to participate in the
CAP Round by filing online option form. This necessarily implies that had
the Petitioner’s name not appeared in the final merit list of CAP, he would
Mamta Kale 5/7
6 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
not have been entitled to participate in the CAP Rounds by filing the online
option form.
14. The subsequent obtaining of the PWD certificate by the
Petitioner cannot have the effect of retrospective insertion of Petitioner’s
name in the final merit list reviving the CAP registration process. It appears
from the facts on record that the Petitioner’s obtaining of the Disability PwD
Certificate was an after thought, considering that the Petitioner’s name had
failed to appear in the final merit list.
15. Although the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that a candidate
suffering from a disability or falling within the PwD category is entitled to
reasonable accommodation, it cannot be extended to the Petitioner where,
due to the Petitioner’s own default in obtaining the Disability Certificate
prior to the publication of the final merit list in CAP Round is required to be
accommodated. Such reasonable accommodation is not contemplated by
the Supreme Court in its decisions. In the event that this Court were
inclined to accommodate the Petitioner, being a person with disability
(PwD), and allow the Petitioner to participate in the CAP Round at such a
belated stage, despite his name not appearing in the final merit list, it
would result in depriving meritorious candidates who have duly followed
the schedule prescribed by Respondent No.2 CET Cell, have had their
names published in the final merit list and also fall within the PwD
category.
Mamta Kale 6/7
7 12-wp-10917-2026.doc
16. The Petitioner is however entitled to participate in the
institutional level round. Thus, the Petitioner would not suffer prejudice as
he would be in a position to participate in the institutional level round and
his candidature may be considered for such seats, subject to the availability
of seats in the said course.
17. In that view of the matter, we find no merit in the present
Petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to
costs.
[FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [R.I. CHAGLA, J.]
Mamta Kale 7/7
Checking your session…