Lamka: The Hmar Students’ Association (HSA), Manipur State Committee, has issued a strong clarification defending the disability status of Mr. Jerry Lalhratthang Buongpui following allegations raised in a recent publication questioning his selection under the disability category by the Manipur Public Service Commission (MPSC).
In a press note issued today, the student body stated that reports published online by The Sangai Express and other media outlets on May 30 under the headline “KSA urges MPSC to review selection of candidate under disability category” contained “factual inaccuracies” that allegedly created a misleading impression about the candidate’s professional conduct and disability status.
According to the HSA, Jerry Lalhratthang Buongpui suffers from bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), described as a permanent hearing impairment involving high-frequency hearing loss. The association asserted that he is officially recognised as a person with benchmark disability and possesses a valid disability certificate issued under the authority of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and the Government of Manipur, certifying a 66 percent hearing loss. The statement further noted that he also holds a Unique Disability ID (UDID) card issued under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016.
The HSA strongly refuted allegations that the candidate had “failed multiple medical examinations” to qualify as a person with benchmark disability. It argued that such assertions were misleading and based on incomplete information. The association stated that over the years, Jerry had undergone numerous medical examinations at both government and private hospitals, all of which consistently documented his hearing impairment.
However, the association claimed that inconsistencies arose during assessments conducted through the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) at institutions such as AIIMS and Army Hospitals. According to the HSA, while certain official evaluations reportedly found him ineligible under benchmark disability criteria, tests conducted independently by the candidate at the same institutions produced results qualifying him under the benchmark disability category.
“These conflicting findings” were cited by the association as the reason Jerry approached the Delhi High Court seeking judicial intervention.
Clarifying the sequence of medical examinations related to the UPSC process, the HSA stated that the examination conducted at Safdarjung Hospital was merely a general medical fitness assessment, while the disability evaluation itself was conducted separately at AIIMS. Following the AIIMS assessment, an appeal was reportedly filed, after which the candidate was referred to the Appellate Disability Board at the Army Hospital (Research and Referral), where another assessment was carried out.
The association maintained that different institutions had produced differing results despite conducting similar tests, raising questions over the consistency and transparency of the assessment process.
The HSA also disputed claims that the Delhi High Court had already disposed of the matter conclusively. It clarified that the issue remains sub judice and is currently pending before the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court.
Expressing concern over the repeated use of the word “failed” in relation to the candidate’s medical examinations, the association termed such language “inappropriate and deceptive,” particularly given that the matter remains under judicial consideration.
The HSA further stated that after the allocation of posts by the MPSC, the concerned authorities would independently conduct fresh medical and disability assessments. Welcoming the process, the association expressed confidence that future evaluations would be conducted transparently and in accordance with guidelines issued under Section 56 of the RPwD Act, 2016, specifically concerning the assessment of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss.
In its concluding remarks, the association criticised the Kangleipak Students’ Association (KSA) for allegedly making serious allegations without conducting a comprehensive examination of the facts. It stated that such actions had tarnished the reputation of a hearing-impaired candidate and called for greater responsibility while dealing with sensitive disability-related issues.
Reaffirming its support for Jerry Lalhratthang Buongpui, the HSA said it would continue standing by him “in his effort to fight for justice and for the greater good of persons with disabilities.” The organisation also expressed confidence that the MPSC and competent authorities would conduct all future assessments in a “transparent, impartial, and lawful manner.”
