JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner was injured with a compound fracture in Tibia and Fabula in right leg and with blunt injury in his left ankle tear of ligament in an accident in November 1996 and was declared by the Medical Board for having suffered 40% disability. The petitioner thought that because of the certificate Annexure-1 declaring 40% disability he was eligible for selection against the quota of disabled persons for selection in the combined entrance examination of PMT and PVT held in 1998 conducted by the jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur. The total seats of MBBS Course for the State of Rajasthan is said to be 650 for the admission to MBBS Course in six colleges of Rajasthan as per the instructions issued as Schedule A. The examination was held on 24.6.1998. The petitioner appeared with Roll No. 10423 and was one of the successful candidates having been placed at merit No.97 in the general merit and at No.2 in the merit of reserved disabled category vide Annexure-2. He was called for interview on 25.9.1998 vide Annexure-3. He was directed to report to the Principal, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur on 6.10.1998, but was told by the Udaipur Medical authorities that his name did not appear in the list. He was directed to contact the respondent No.2 i.e. the Principal, S.M.S. Medical College, Jaipur. He came to know that some doubt has been created about the certificate of his disability and, therefore, he was not being considered against the reserved quota of disabled persons. He made representations to the effect that even though he is feeling disabled because of the accident, but if it is felt that he is not disabled person, in that situation, he be considered against the general merit and for the reason that he is even otherwise on merit as well, he is entitled to admission on either of the counts. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a direction to the respondents to grant him the admission in R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur on the basis of his general merit or against the reservation of the disabled persons. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that on either of the ground, he is entitled to the admission and admission cannot be refused if he is on merit otherwise as well. 4. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that on either of the ground, he is entitled to the admission and admission cannot be refused if he is on merit otherwise as well. 4. In the reply, it is stated that the contents of the certificate of his disablement issued by the Board was under verification and, therefore, he could not be given the admission against the category of disabled persons. However, it was admitted that he was placed at No.2 in the physically disabled category. It is also not denied that even otherwise the petitioner is also on merit having been so placed at No.97 in general category. It is the case of the respondents that because of the reason that the petitioner had applied under the category of handicapped, his candidature could only be considered under that category and not in general category. It is also submitted that some complaint was received to the effect that the petitioner was not an handicapped person and, therefore, investigations were to be ordered. It is averred in the written statement that even though the petitioner was placed on higher merit in general category, but still he was not entitled to be admitted on the merits attained by him. It is submitted that the petitioner had not reported for another check-up and, therefore, no blame can be put on the respondents for not granting the admission. 5. The respondent submits that the conduct of the petitioner for not turning up for medical examination does cast a doubt about his being an handicapped person. The petitioner did feel that because of the compound fractures as narrated above and because of the certificate issued by the Board (Annexure-1), he was handicapped person and, therefore, applied under that category. However, he did fall on the merit also in the general merit list. If ultimately it is found by way of examination of the petitioner that he is not handicapped to the extent of requirement for being handicapped, it cannot be said that the petitioner looses his right to be considered on merits of the general category, if he falls on merit. The merit of the general category is also prepared by the Controller of Examination and apart from that merit, separate merit of reserved category is also prepared. The merit of the general category is also prepared by the Controller of Examination and apart from that merit, separate merit of reserved category is also prepared. To say that the petitioner cannot be considered for admission, even though he is on merit, only because of the reason that he had applied under the handicapped category, shall be arbitrary and discriminatory. 6. The petitioner was also present in the court during the course of arguments. He does have a defect in the leg and limbs while walking. Whether such defect falls under the category of handicapped or not, is to be decided by the Medical Board. He has been asked to report to the Principal, S.M.S. Medical College today itself with the direction to the Principal, S.M.S. Medical College to examine him about his disability. If it is found that he does suffer the disability, there shall be no dispute that he shall be entitled to the admission as per merit of disabled candidates but if ultimately the Medical Board comes to the finding that his disability is not to that extent as to consider him under the category of disabled persons, in such situation, the petitioner has a right to be considered on his merit in general merit list and in case any person junior to the petitioner on merit list (General or Reserved) has been admitted, the petitioner has a right for admission to the course of MBBS for which he had appeared and was placed on merit No.97.With the above-said observations, the writ petition is allowed at admission stage. No order as to costs.Petition allowed. *******