Allahabad High Court
MADHAV RAJ AGARWALversusUNION OF INDIA AND 8 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to claim a seat in the reserved category based on the medical certificate, and the appellate authority's decision is set aside.
Summary
Madhav Raj Agarwal, a person with low vision, claimed a reservation seat under the benchmark disability provision of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016. Although his medical board assessment recorded only 1% disability and the appellate board found no disability, a medical certificate had been issued stating a disability of more than 40% and no appeal was filed against it. The Court noted that the statute defines benchmark disability as not less than 40% and that the certificate, once issued, creates a right to the reservation. Relying on the earlier decision in Somya Pal v. Union of India, the Court set aside the appellate authority’s finding and ordered that the petitioner be allowed to claim a seat in the reserved category. The parties were directed to act on the website copy of the order upon the petitioner’s undertaking to obtain a certified copy, and the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a petitioner is entitled to reservation benefits when the medical board and appellate board assessments contradict a medical certificate indicating benchmark disability.
- Interpretation of the benchmark disability threshold under the RPwD Act, 2016.
- Whether the appellate authority's decision can be set aside in favor of the issued medical certificate.
Legislation cited
- Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016
Subjects
- reservation
- benchmark disability
- RPwD Act
- low vision
- medical certificate
- appellate authority
- disability assessment
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35377 of 2026
Madhav Raj Agarwal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 8 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar, Wasim Alam
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Anurag Sharma, Firdos Ahmad,
Fuzail Ahmad Ansari
Court No. - 29
HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J.
HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J.
1. Mr. Wasim Alam, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and
submits, his client is entitled to the reservation for persons with benchmark
disability (PwBD). Facts are similar to facts in Writ-C no.33739 of 2026
(Somya Pal Vs. Union of India and 8 others) disposed of by us on order
dated 25th August, 2026. The only difference is, his client having
benchmark disability of low vision, certified to be greater than 40% went
before the Medical Board to obtain eligibility certificate. The Board returned
percentage of disability at 1%. His client took the matter to the appellate
board, which said there was no disability.
2. Mr. Raunak Tiwari, learned advocate holding the brief appears on behalf
of respondent nos.1 to 3 and 5. Mr. Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned advocate
appears for respondent no.6. Mrs. Akansha Sharma, learned advocate
appears for respondent no.7 (the counseling authority). Mrs. Sharma
submits, first round of counseling is already over. Mrs. Pooja Agarwal,
learned advocate appears for respondent no.8.
3. We think fit to observe that the statute prescribes Benchmark Disability as
not less than 40%. In the circumstances, it is surprising that the prescribed
authority assessed petitioner's disability at greater than 40% instead of a
specific percentage. Also surprising is findings by the Medical and Appellate
Boards, of negligible or no disability. Notwithstanding, as the statute [Rights
of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016] provides for issuance of
certificate and appeal therefrom and the facts showing that the certificate
was issued on no appeal preferred, petitioner is entitled to the relief.
WRIC No. 35377 of 2026
2
4. The writ petition stands covered by Somya Pal (supra). Direction
paragraph 6 from said order is reproduced below.
"6. Petitioner be allowed to claim a seat in the category on strength of
medical certificate dated 11th August, 2026, disregarding the conclusion
given therein purportedly on basis of assessment of petitioner's disability
at 28%. Opinion of the appellate authority is set aside and quashed.
Petitioner will communicate certified copy of this order to respondent
no.7. Said respondent without waiting for such communication will act on
website copy of this order."
Same direction as applicable is made herein. Parties to act on website copy
of this order upon petitioner's undertaking to apply for certified copy.
5. The writ petition is disposed of.
September 8, 2026
Kpy
(Arindam Sinha,J.)
(Satya Veer Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…