The woman has qualified the NEET (UG) Examination 2026 and her father is a member of ESIC Scheme. (AI-generated image)After her father’s name appeared as “Vishram Singh” in some documents and “Vishram Singh Gurjar” in others, the Rajasthan High Court ordered the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation to provide an 18-year-old NEET-UG 2026 qualifier with a certificate demonstrating her eligibility for benefits as the daughter of an insured employee.Justice Sudesh Bansal directed a fresh Ward IP Certificate to be issued within a period of thirty days from the order.“The respondents-ESIC shall delete the word ‘provisionally’ in the Ward IP Certificate, already issued in the name of petitioner, or shall issue a fresh Ward IP Certificate within a period of 30 days from today,” the August 20 order said. Justice Sudesh Bansal heard a NEET student’s plea for quota.NEET quota certificate An 18-year-old student qualified the NEET-UG 2026 examination and sought admission to MBBS/BDS courses under the Ward of the Insured Person quota available in ESIC colleges. Her father is an insured member of the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC).ESIC initially refused to issue her a Ward of IP Certificate, which was required to claim the quota benefit. The issue arose because her father’s name appeared as “Vishram Singh” in the same documents, including her CBSE marksheet, while other documents mentioned it as “Vishram Singh Gurjar.” The Rajasthan High Court, on July 15, directed ESIC to issue the student a provisional certificate, ignoring the discrepancy caused by the addition of “Gurjar” to her father’s name.ESIC subsequently issued the provisional certificate. During the final hearing, ESIC stated that it had no objection to issuing the certificate without the word “provisionally”, as Vishram Singh was admittedly an ESIC member and the student was his daughter. On August 20, the court directed ESIC to either remove the word “provisionally” from the certificate already issued or issue a fresh Ward of IP Certificate within 30 days.Father’s name mismatch delayed NEET quota certificate Advocates Shobhit Tiwari and Divanshu Gupta contended that Meenakshi qualified NEET-UG 2026 and was eligible for MBBS/BDS courses under the Ward of Insured Person quota, as her father was an insured member of the ESIC Scheme.Story continues below this ad The counsel contended that ESIC had denied the Ward of IP Certificate only because the father’s name appeared as “Vishram Singh” in some documents and “Vishram Singh Gurjar” in others. They relied on documents, including the CBSE marksheet, Jan Aadhaar Card, Ration Card, and E-Identity Card, to explain the discrepancy.ESIC ultimately stated that it had no objection to issuing the Ward of IP Certificate without the word “provisionally”, since Vishram Singh was admittedly a member of the ESIC Scheme and the student was his daughter.The court directed ESIC to remove the word “provisionally” from the student’s Ward of IP Certificate or issue her a fresh certificate within 30 days. The court disposed of the petition accordingly.Father must fund daughter’s NEET-PG studies even after she is 18Recently, in a ruling, the Karnataka High Court has said a father can be asked to bear the educational expenses of his daughter under the Domestic Violence Act, adding that a parent’s obligation to provide for their child’s education does not end when a child turns 18.Story continues below this adActing on the petition of a young woman seeking money to pay for her college studies, Justice H P Sandesh said her father’s income records clearly established his financial capacity and rejected his argument that he was not liable to fund his daughter’s educational expenses after she became an adult.“It is the obligation of the parents to provide basic amenities, health and education, which cannot be said to be extinguished on the child attaining majority. While defining economic abuse, the Legislature has also included deprivation of all or any economic or financial resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled under any law or custom,” the July 17 order said.Somya Panwar is a legal journalist at The Indian Express (Digital), where she covers the various High Courts across the country and the Supreme Court of India. Her writing is driven by a deep interest in how law influences society, particularly in areas of gender, feminism, and women’s rights. She is especially drawn to stories that examine questions of equality, autonomy, and social justice through the lens of the courts. Her work aims to make complex legal developments accessible, contextual, and relevant to everyday readers, with a focus on explaining what court decisions mean beyond legal jargon and how they shape public life. Alongside reporting, she manages the social media presence for Indian Express Legal, where she designs and curates posts using her understanding of digital trends, audience behaviour, and visual communication. Combining legal insight with strategic content design, she works on building engagement and expanding the desk’s digital reach. Somya holds a B.A. LL.B and a Master’s degree in Journalism. Before moving fully into media, she gained experience in litigation and briefly worked in corporate, giving her reporting a strong foundation. ... Read More Tags:NEETRajasthan High Court