Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Dr. Lay Kanjibhai Paghdar vs Union Of India : (2014) 14 Scc 383; (2) … on 30 June, 2025
APHC010250312025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3328]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA
PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO: 12871/2025
Between:
1.DR. LAY KANJIBHAI PAGHDAR,, S/O KANJIBHAIPAGHDAR, AGED 29
YEARS R/O 506, SL TOWERS, NOWROJI ROAD, OPP SBI BANK,
NOVOTEL UP ROAD, MAHARANIPETA,VISAKHAPATNANN-530002
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1.DR NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, HAVING OFFICE AT
DR.N.T.R UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, PADAVALAREVU,
GUNADALA, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH 520004 REP BY ITS
REGISTRAR
2.ANDHRA MEDICAL COLLEGE, VISAKHAPATNAM. HAVING OFFICE AT
P843 PLUS HWX, MEDICAL COLLEGE ROAD KING GEORGE
HOSPITAL, OPP. COLLECTOR OFFICE, MAHARANI PETA,
VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 530002. REP BY ITS
PRINCIPAL
3.THE STATE COMMISSIONER FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES,
ANDHRA PRADESH, HAVING OFFICE AT 74-14-2, RAJANARENDRA
BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, YANAMALAKUDURU ROAD, KRISHNA
NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520007, ANDHRA PRADESH
2
4.NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION, HAVING OFFICE AT POCKET - 14,
SECTOR - 8, NEW DELHI - 110077 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN
5.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, HEALTH, MEDICAL AND FAMILY WELFARE
DEPARTMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT 5TH BLOCK,GROUND FLOOR,
ROOM NO157,A.P SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DT.,
ANDHRA PRADESH - 522503
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.TURAGA SAI SURYA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
2.Tata Venkata Sridevi,Standing Counsel For Dr.NTR University of Health
SciencesThe Court made the following ORDER:
Heard Sri T. Sai Surya, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Smt. T.V.
Sridevi, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.1 and Sri R. Kalyan
Chakravarthy, learned Government Pleader for Medical, Health and Family
Welfare appearing for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5.
2. The interim prayer sought by the Writ Petitioner is as under:
“For all the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of
the writ petition it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to
direct the Respondents No. 1 and 2 to immediately issue a provisional
course completion certificate and release all original academic documents
of the Petitioner on or before 22-05-2025 upon completion of 939 working
days, in line with the binding Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations,
2023; pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such other
order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case.”
3
3. Although several facts are involved in the present case, such of those facts
which are necessary for considering the above mentioned prayer are only
referred to herein.
4. It is the case of the Writ Petitioner that he had completed M.S. General
Surgery by availing reservation under Persons with Disabilities (PwD) quota; that
the Writ Petitioner suffers from 78% Locomotor Disability; that on account of
“sustained and targeted harassment by Dr. Subramanyan, Professor in the
Department of General Surgery” and on account of repeated discrimination with
respect to the disability suffered by the Writ Petitioner, the Writ Petitioner got
mentally affected; that the said Professor pressurised the Writ Petitioner to
resign from the course by asserting that in the opinion of the Professor, the Writ
Petitioner is unfit to pursue a surgical career; that the Professor subjected the
Writ Petitioner to frequent medical fitness examinations despite having already
been declared medically fit at the time of admission; that the said Professor went
to the extent of addressing letters to the Principal of the Institution for conducting
fresh medical fitness test solely in the case of the Writ Petitioner; and that as a
consequence of the unbearable harassment meted out by Dr. Subramanyan,
Professor in the Department of General Surgery, the Writ Petitioner took a break
from the course between December, 2022 and April, 2023 due to severe mental
distress caused by the hostile environment and continuous harassment and went
away to his native place which is in the State of Gujarat.
5. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner basing on the
strength of the averments made in the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ
Petition that when the Writ Petitioner has returned and wanted to formally rejoin
the M.S. General Surgery programme, the Professor had written a letter to re-
verify the fitness of the Writ Petitioner, but since the leave of the Writ Petitioner
was approved, the Writ Petitioner was able to rejoin the course; that, thereafter,
4
Dr. Subramanyan was transferred from Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam
on 06.05.2024.
6. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that the parents of
the Writ Petitioner have also addressed a letter to the Principal of the
Respondent No.2 College after transfer of Dr. Subramanyan; that the Writ
Petitioner has lodged a complaint to the Chief Commissioner for Persons with
Disabilities; that after rejoining of M.S. General Surgery course in April, 2023, the
Writ Petitioner has actively participated in all clinical responsibilities that were
assigned to him; that in order to compensate the time lost and to demonstrate
the dedication of the Writ Petitioner, the Writ Petitioner has worked all weekly off-
days by refraining from availing the weekly offs during the weekends; that the
transfer of Dr. Subramanyan from Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam, had
allowed and enabled the Writ Petitioner to positively focus his work without fear
or prejudice, thereby enabling him to perform to the best of his capabilities.
7. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that in a three
year post-graduate course, total number of working days are 1095 days; that as
per the Regulations, the working days which are required in the entire three year
post-graduate course are 939 days; that the post-graduate medical graduates
are permitted to avail 20 casual leaves per annum and five paid leaves as per
Rule 5.5 of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 (PGMER-
2023); that as per the clarification given in Rule 5.5, if the candidate avails leaves
in excess of the permitted number of days, his/her term of course shall be
extended by the same number of days to complete the training period; that the
Writ Petitioner was absent for about 211 days out of 939 days; that the Writ
Petitioner has compensated a portion of the number days absent by working on
104 Sundays without availing the weekly-off; that the Writ Petitioner is also
entitled to casual leaves of about 60 days over a period of three years; that the
5
course got completed on 04.05.2025; that the Writ Petitioner secured 62.38% in
the examination held on 28.02.2025 in M.S. General Surgery.
8. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that despite the
fact that the Writ Petitioner has made-up complete 939 days in accordance with
the clarification to Rule 5.5 of the PGMER-2023; the Respondent No.2 College
has declined to issue “Course Completion Certificate” in order to enable the Writ
Petitioner to appear for the purpose of participation in counseling and for seat
allotment and admission to Super Specialty (DM/M.ch) courses.
9. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that at present the
third round of counseling has commenced from 23.06.2025 and would continue
upto 07.07.2025 for the NEET Super Specialty Course.
10. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that, if the Writ
Petitioner is prevented from participating in the third round of counseling (from
23.06.2025 to 07.07.2025), the Writ Petitioner would suffer irreparable injury,
inasmuch as the Writ Petitioner would be prevented from participating in the
counseling for the present academic year.
11. The Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam represented by the Principal
(Respondent No.2) has filed the Counter Affidavit. The averments in the Counter
Affidavit are to the effect that the Writ Petitioner is not entitled to any indulgence
so as to enable him to participate in the third round of counseling in the NEET
Super Specialty Courses.
12. The facts considered by this Court are already mentioned hereinabove. The
above facts would prima-facie indicate that the Writ Petitioner has completed his
M.S. General Surgery post-graduate course by securing 62.38% and that the
Writ Petitioner suffers from 78% of Locomotor Disability which falls under the
category of ‘Benchmark Disability as per the provisions of Rights of Persons with
Disabilities Act, 2016 (For short, the Act, 2016) and that he was subjected to
6
harassment and mental agony by one Dr. Subramanyan, Professor in
Department of General Surgery. The facts would indicate that the said Dr.
Subramanyan was transferred from Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam on
06.05.2024 and that the Writ Petitioner was able to successfully complete the
M.S. General Surgery course only on account of lack of discrimination by Dr.
Subramanyan from 06.05.2024 which is the date of his transfer. The facts would
indicate that the break in the course by the Writ Petitioner was on account of
mental agony and that the Writ Petitioner was subjected to humiliation at the
behest of Dr. Subramanyan and that the said Professor had subjected the Writ
Petitioner to several medical fitness examinations with a view to harass him and
also to ensure that the Writ Petitioner would get disqualified from the M.S.
General Surgery course. The facts would also discloses that the parents of the
Writ Petitioner have also addressed letters to the Head of the Institution followed
by the complaint made by the Writ Petitioner against Sri Dr. Subramanyan after
his transfer from Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam on 06.05.2024.
13. It is the contention of the Writ Petitioner that the computation of number of
working days put in by the Writ Petitioner had been incorrectly made by the
Official Respondents and on account of this incorrect calculation, the
Respondent No.2 had declined to issue “Course Completion Certificate” with
respect to the post-graduate course. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel
for the Writ Petitioner that the number of leaves granted were not properly
reckoned by the Respondent College, inasmuch as the Writ Petitioner has
fulfilled required number of working days. The attendance of 939 working days
has stoutly been opposed by the Official Respondents. It is submitted that 104
Sundays in which the Writ Petitioner had worked cannot be reckoned by the
Respondent College for the purpose of computation of the number of working-
days.
7
14. Having regard to the above facts, this Court is required to examine whether
the Sundays worked by the Writ Petitioner can be counted or not. This Court will
also have to decide whether the number of leaves availed by the Writ Petitioner
can be set off against the casual leaves or not. This Court will also have to
examine whether it is sufficient for the Writ Petitioner to have 80% of the
attendance out of the total number of working days. In view of the Provisions
contained in The Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short the ‘Act,
2016’) which mandates this Court to examine the truth or the otherwise with
regard to the allegations made by the Writ Petitioner against Dr. Subramanyan,
Professor in the Department of General Surgery upto the date of his transfer on
06.05.2024. This Court is also required to examine whether the Respondent
Authorities are required to mandatorily adhere to the provisions of the Act, 2016
and whether the allegations made by the Writ Petitioner would fall under the
Sections 2 (m), 2 (r), 2 (y), Sections 16, 17 in Chapter-III, and Chapter-XVI, of
the Act, 2016.
15. Having examined various allegations made by the Writ Petitioner, this
Court, during the course of hearing on 19.06.2025, had orally directed Dr.
K.V.S.M. Sandhya Rani, Principal of Respondent No.2 who was present in the
Court to submit the photocopies of all the complaints made against Dr.
Subramanyan in a sealed cover on the next date of hearing. When this Writ
Petition was again heard on 19.06.2025, this Court had enquired with the Ld.
Counsel for Respondent No.2 whether the copies of complaints were brought in
a sealed-cover or not? The Counsel for Respondent No.2 had stated that the
Respondent No.2 has not been able to send them.
16. The facts in this case would indicate that the allegations are of serious
nature and this Court is required to examine the same in terms of the provisions
of the Act, 2016 as indicated above. During the pendency of the enquiry by this
Court, the Writ Petitioner cannot be left-out high and dry, inasmuch as the Writ
8
Petitioner may not be able to participate in the third round of counseling
scheduled to take place from 23.06.2025 to 07.07.2025. This Court is also
required to examine whether any concession could be given to the Writ
Petitioner with regard to attendance in terms of the provisions of Act, 2016, and
also as interpreted by the Hon’ble Apex Court in (1) Justice Sunanda
Bhandare Foundation vs. Union of India : (2014) 14 SCC 383; (2) Vikash
Kumar Vs. UPPC and Ors.: 2O21 (5) SCC 370; (3) Syed Bashir-uddin
Qadri Vs. Nazir Ahmed shah : (2O10) 3 SCC 6O3; (4) Avni Prakash vs.
National Testing Agency (NTA) and ors., : (2O23) 2 SCC 286; and (5)
Gulshan Kumar vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection and Ors :
2O25 SCC Online 223).
17. During the last hearing, this Court had directed the Writ Petitioner to have
an Affidavit filed by the Writ Petitioner that he would undertake to complete the
required number of working days as per the regulations after attending the
counseling which is scheduled to be closed from 08.07.2025 onwards. In
pursuance of the said direction, the Writ Petitioner had filed sworn Affidavit dated
24.06.2025 undertaking to complete a shortfall of 12 working days as stated by
the Official Respondents in their Counter-Affidavit. The said sworn Affidavit
dated 24.06.2025 filed by the Writ Petitioner is taken on record.
18. Keeping the above issues in mind, this Court deems it appropriate to issue
the following directions:
i. Dr. Subramanyan, Professor in the Department of General Surgery
is Suo-moto impleaded as Respondent No.6. Learned Standing
Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 is directed to furnish the
current address and place of work of Dr. Subramanyan and also his
e-mail I.D to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and also to
the Registry. The Principal of Respondent No.2 College shall also
9inform Dr. Subramanyan about he being suo-moto impleaded by
this Court as Respondent No.6. Registry is directed to make
necessary changes in the Cause Title.
ii. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner is directed to take out
urgent personal notice in respect of Dr. Subramanyan, Professor in
the Department of General Surgery within three days from today
and file proof of receipt of notice within two days thereafter. Learned
Counsel for the Writ Petitioner is also given liberty to serve a copy
of notice through the e-mail of Dr. Subramanyan along with
scanned copy of the Writ Petition and the Counter-Affidavit filed by
the Respondent No.2. For this purpose, the Respondent No.2 is
directed to furnish e-mail I.D of Dr. Subramanyan.
iii. Sri R. Kalyan Chakravarthy, Ld. Government Pleader appearing for
the Respondent No.2 has now submitted the complaints lodged by
the students against Dr. Subramanyan in a sealed cover. The
same is taken on record. The Court Officer is directed to keep the
sealed cover under safe custody. The Superintendent of Police,
Crimes and Investigation, Visakhapatnam is directed to seize the
record relating to the correspondence made by Dr. Subramanyan to
the Principal of Respondent No.2 and also any other authority with
a view to subject the Writ Petitioner for medical fitness/medical
examination. The Superintendent of Police is directed to submit the
entire record in a sealed cover to this Court through the Registrar
(Judicial) within two (02) weeks from today.
iv. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to communicate a copy of this Order
to the Superintendent of Police, Crimes and Investigation,
Visakhapatnam, within two days from today.
10
v. The State Commissioner for Persons with Disability, Andhra
Pradesh shall submit Status Report on the complaint made by the
Writ Petitioner dated 28.04.2025 (Ex.P.7).
vi. The Principal, Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam
(Respondent No.2) shall issue Provisional Course Completion
Certificate in respect of M.S. General Surgery course and also to
release all original academic documents of the Writ Petitioner on or
before 02.07.2025.
vii. Dr. Subramanyan (newly impleaded Respondent No.6) is directed
to file Counter Affidavit within two weeks from today.
viii. The concerned Counsel are directed to communicate the gist of this
Order to the respective Official Respondents forthwith for effective
compliance.
ix. Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner is directed to take out urgent
personal notice in respect of the State Commissioner for Persons
with Disability, Andhra Pradesh (Respondent No.3) within three
days from today and file proof of receipt of notice within two days
thereafter. The said Respondent No.3 shall file Counter Affidavit
within two weeks from today.
19. List the matter on 14.07.2025.
__________________________________________
GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J
Dt: 30.06.2025
Note: Issue CC today
B/o. JKS/MNR