From: Noah Sebastian [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 8:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: ‘52% disabled man eligible for PG med’ — Rosy Sequeira

 


‘52% disabled man eligible for PG med’


— Rosy Sequeira

Mumbai: 

Seven years after Bombay high court allowed a man with over 50% limb disability 
to pursue MBBS, it came to his aid again by allowing his plea to pursue 
postgraduate medical course.

Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, via video conference on April 30, allowed 25-year-old Dr 
Rajdeep Deshmukh’s petition after assistant government pleader Reena Salunkhe 
said he is eligible for admission to the PG medical course in a nonsurgical 
branch.

On April 23, the HC had stayed the publication of the first merit cum selection 
list after it was told by Dr Deshmukh’s advocate that the last date for 
publication was April 24, 2020, and he would not get seat of his choice.

Dr Deshmukh was born with phocomelia, a condition involving the malformation of 
the limbs. He was born with shortened index and middle fingers of both hands 
and both great toes.

Dr Deshmukh’s petition said while he was certified with 52% upper limb 
disability, his upper limb functional capacity is very strong. In September 
2013, the HC had allowed him to pursue MBBS under the physically handicap 
category after it constituted a medical board of J J Hospital.

Hoping to secure admission to a PG non-surgical course, Dr Deshmukh appeared 
for National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) on January 5, 2020. After 
applying online for seat, he appeared before a JJ Hospital medical board to 
obtain a disability certificate but was certified as unfit for the course. He 
then moved HC.




Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe send a message to
[email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the 
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;

2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent 
through this mailing list..

Reply via email to