Valid UDID disability card cannot be overridden by reassessment using the same equipment, Madras High Court allows PwBD medical admission participation

The petitioner, claiming locomotor disability, possessed a UDID Card issued by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPwD), recording her disability at 50%.

Relying on the UDID Card, she applied for NEET-UG 2026 under the Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) category. During counselling, the third respondent required her to undergo assessment by the Regional Medical Board. That Board assessed her disability at 20%, following which the petitioner appealed; the Appellate Disability Assessment Board assessed it at 28%.

The petitioner challenged the Appellate Medical Assessment Certificate dated 12 August 2026, contending that the re-assessment was inconsistent with the valid UDID Card and that no new or superior equipment had been used by the Medical Boards.

Whether the Regional Medical Board and the Appellate Disability Assessment Board could re-determine the petitioner’s disability percentage despite the valid UDID Card issued by the competent DEPwD authority?

Whether the petitioner could be denied participation in NEET-UG 2026 counselling under the PwBD category solely on the basis of the lower assessment of 20% and 28% by the Medical Boards?

The Court applied Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the Revised Advisory dated 15 October 2025 issued by the DEPwD, under which a medical institution or board may additionally assess disability where it possesses better tools, equipment, machines or technology capable of producing a more accurate assessment.

It further applied Clauses 9.2 and 9.6 of the National Medical Commission’s Guidelines on Assessment of Persons with Benchmark Disabilities: a valid permanent UDID Card is the primary documentary evidence of the existence, nature and extent of the specified disability, and a candidate should not be denied PwBD consideration merely because of a procedural defect or discrepancy in the card where the disability is otherwise established in law.

The Guidelines were framed pursuant to the Supreme Court’s directions in Civil Appeal No. 10611 of 2024 dated 15 October 2024.

The Court noted that the petitioner’s disability had already been assessed at 50% and recorded in her UDID Card issued by the competent DEPwD authority.

Although the subsequent Boards assessed the disability at 20% and 28%, respectively, the fourth respondent had not used any new, advanced or superior tools or equipment for reassessment.

Applying the Revised Advisory, the Court held that re-determination was permissible only where the assessing institution possessed better technology or equipment capable of providing a more accurate assessment. Since that condition was absent, the subsequent assessment was unsustainable.

The Court also held that the valid UDID Card could not be disregarded for admission purposes, particularly when Clause 9.2 treated it as the primary documentary evidence of disability.

It consequently directed the third respondent to permit the petitioner to participate in the subsequent NEET-UG 2026 counselling under the PwBD quota on the basis of her valid UDID Card; the Court also noted its earlier direction reserving one PwBD seat for her.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of without costs.