Safiya Malik

The High Court of Rajasthan Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand directed the respondents to admit the petitioner to the B.Sc. (Nursing) Course under the Armed Forces Medical Services. The Court found no justification in the denial of admission based on a temporary medical condition and ordered compliance with its directive within four weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment.

The petitioner, a 19-year-old candidate from Jaipur, Rajasthan, participated in the admission process for the B.Sc. (Nursing) Course-2024 under the Armed Forces Medical Services. After successfully clearing the screening process, the petitioner was subjected to a medical examination by the Special Medical Board (SMB), which declared her "unfit" on account of low hemoglobin levels.

Also Read: Supreme Court: IAS Officers Can't Write ACRs Of Indian Forest Service Officers Up To APCCF Rank | Reporting Authority Must Be Immediate Superior Within Forest Department

Following this, the petitioner filed an appeal and was re-examined by the Appellate Medical Board (AMB), which reaffirmed the findings of the SMB and again declared her "unfit" due to persistent low hemoglobin levels. According to the petitioner, the medical results were influenced by heavy blood loss caused by menstruation at the time of examination. The contention was that the condition was temporary and not representative of her general health.

In light of these developments, the petitioner approached the High Court of Rajasthan, seeking directions for reconsideration of her medical eligibility and subsequent admission to the nursing course. Her prayer was explicitly for a directive to the respondents to admit her after re-conducting a medical examination.

An interim order was passed by the Court on 07.10.2024 directing a provisional review medical check-up to reassess the petitioner’s hemoglobin levels. Consequently, a Review Medical Board was constituted, which examined the petitioner and found her "fit for Anemia."

Additionally, on 15.10.2024, the Court issued a directive to the respondents to keep one seat of the B.Sc. (Nursing) Course vacant pending the final outcome of the petition. This seat remained unfilled at the time of final adjudication.

The respondents opposed the petition, asserting that the petitioner was one among 18 candidates declared unfit due to low hemoglobin levels and that no statutory provision permitted a review medical test. They contended that granting admission based on a review would undermine fairness towards the other similarly placed candidates.

They further argued that the course had already commenced in January 2025 and late admission could prevent the petitioner from completing the course within the prescribed duration.

However, the petitioner contended that the refusal to conduct a review did not align with the temporary nature of her medical condition. She stated that her low hemoglobin levels were due to menstrual bleeding and not indicative of a chronic ailment.

The matter was heard, and relevant records and medical opinions were examined, including those from the SMB, AMB, and Review Medical Board. The Review Medical Board’s findings demonstrated a clear improvement in her health condition, making her eligible for admission.

The Court recorded the nature of the petitioner’s temporary condition in the following terms: "Anemia is not a permanent kind of disease. Anemia affects a person’s red blood cells and hemoglobin. Hemoglobin is the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen from lungs to all the tissues and the organs in human body."

The judgment elaborated further, noting that: "Heavy blood flow during menstruation is also known as 'Menorrhagia' which normally affects 10% to 15% of women annually in India creating iron deficiency in their body."

Justice Dhand acknowledged the physiological causes that might lead to temporary anemia: "Heavy menstrual bleeding is caused by imbalances in a female’s levels of hormones, especially progesterone and estrogen."

The Court found that the petitioner was found unfit due to a transient medical issue and noted: "When her medical examinations by the SMB and the AMB were conducted... within a short span of 24 hours."

The Court commented on the importance of compassionate interpretation of such medical conditions in the context of education access, stating: "The respondents are expected to adopt a lenient and compassionate view in this matter."

Significantly, the Court upheld the review medical board's authority and findings, stating: "Among all these opinions, the opinion of the Review Medical Board would prevail, as it has concluded that the petitioner was found to be ‘fit for Anemia’."

In a categorical observation addressing the core issue, the Court stated: "A girl’s health condition like the petitioner, should not hinder her access to education merely because that of her hemoglobin was found to be below the prescribed level because of heavy menstrual bleeding."

The Bench also rejected the respondents' argument regarding other similarly placed candidates, stating: "If those 17 other candidates chose not to assert their rights and passively accepted the respondents’ decision declaring them as ‘unfit’... the petitioner cannot be deprived to get admission, especially when she was declared ‘fit’ by the respondents themselves."

Also Read: "An Offence Against the Very Integrity, Sovereignty, and Security of Bharat": Delhi High Court Rejects Bail in Espionage Conspiracy Involving Classified Military Documents

On the timing and urgency of the petitioner's response, the Court recorded: "The petitioner has approached this Court immediately after passing of the order by the AMB... accordingly, a review medical board was constituted and review medical examinations of the petitioner was conducted."

The Court issued the following directive: "The instant writ petition stands disposed of by issuing direction to the respondents to admit the petitioner in B.Sc. (Nursing) Course, in any of the Nursing College under the Armed Forces Medical Services, wherein one seat is lying vacant as per order dated 15.10.2024 passed by this Court, if she otherwise found suitable for admission."

Further, the Court stated in explicit terms: "Needless to observe that the order passed by this Court would be complied with by the respondents within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order."

In disposing of the ancillary issues, the judgment concluded: "Stay application and all other pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of."

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioners: Mr. Punit Singhvi with Mr. Ayush Singh, Ms. Shraddha Mehta, Mr. Madhur Shrivastava, Mr. Mihir Jangid
For the Respondents: Ms. Manjeet Kaur, Ms. Srishti Arora (OIC)

Case Title: Sakshi Choudhary v. Union of India & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025: RJ-JP:20561
Case Number: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15736/2024
Bench: Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand

[Read/Download order]