NEET Exam Becomes Inclusive: The Madurai Bench of Madras Court Orders Special Accommodation for NEET Candidate with Medical Needs

Case Title – Ms. Monisha Vs. The National Testing Agency & Anr.

Case Number – W.P. (MD) No. 9920 of 2024

Dated on – 26^th April, 2024

Quorum – Justice G. R. Swaminathan

FACTS OF THE CASE

In the case of Ms. Monisha Vs. The National Testing Agency & Anr., the Appellant instituted a Writ Petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition was instituted before the Madurai Bench of Madras Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus for instructing the National Testing Agency  (NTA), Respondent No.1, to allow the Appellant to wear a diaper and change it once or twice during the NEET (UG)-2024 Examination that is to be held on the 5^th of March, 2024 since the Appellant, in the said case, suffers from the lack of control on urine due to a medical condition, which was developed when the Appellant was around 4 years old and was scalded by hot oil accidently and is taking treatment for LETM/NMO/Spectrum Disorder/ Neurogenic Bladder on OPD basic, for which she requires to wear a diaper continuously as well as change it more often.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

1. The Appellant, through their counsel, in the said case contented that due to the prevailing medical condition, she needs to wear a diaper during the examination and requires to change it as and when needed.
2. The Appellant, through their counsel, in the said case contented that denial of the permission to wear a diaper during the NEET (UG) exam and changing the same as and when required is a violation of the basic human rights of the Appellant under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, especially the principle of reasonable accommodation.

CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT

1. The Respondent, through their counsel, in the said case initially did not respond to the representation of the Appellant on dated 8^th of March, 2024, compelling her to institute a Writ Petition.
2. The Respondent, through their counsel, in the said case, contended that the dress code of the examination of NEET (UG)-2024, does not address the particular concerns raised by the Appellant in regard to wearing a diaper during the examination.

LEGAL PROVISIONS

1. Article 14 of the Constitution of India prescribes that The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the Indian territory, on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth
2. Article 15(3) of the Constitution of India prescribes that The State may continue to make laws that provide special provisions for women and children
3. Article 21 of the Constitution of India prescribes that No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedures established by the law
4. Section 20(2) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, mandates that no government establishment shall discriminate against any person with disability in any matter relating to the employment
5. Section 17 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, expects the appropriate government and local authorities to take specific measures to promote and facilitate inclusive education
6. Section 2(y) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, defines the term “Reasonable Accommodation”
7. Section 2(h) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, defines the term “Discrimination” in relation to disability

ISSUES

1. The main issue of the case whirls around whether the principle of reasonable accommodation should be unfurled to individuals with special needs, despite them not falling in the ambit of disabilities recognized by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016?
2. Whether the request of the Appellant to wear a diaper and change the same during the ongoing examination of NEET (UG)-2024 is justifiable under the provisions of the Constitution of India and pertinent legal principles?

COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGMENT

The court in the case of Ms. Monisha Vs. The National Testing Agency & Anr., observed that although the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, does not overtly cover individuals with special needs outside its recognised disabilities, the principle of reasonable accommodation should be applied to all the individuals with special needs. The Court, taking into consideration, the medical condition of the Appellant and the indispensability to wear a diaper as well as a change it as and when required, the court held that the denial of this facility to the Appellant would amount to discrimination under the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court, in this present case, instructed the examination authorities to accommodate the special needs of the Appellant during the NEET (UG)-2024 examination by allowing her to wear a diaper as well as a change it as and when required. The court stressed on the gravity of furnishing the apt facilities, inclusive of adequate toilet amenities and sanitary products, for all the candidates, specifically girls, to evade discrimination and assure a fair examination process.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Sruti Sikha Maharana

Click Here to View Judgment