< Back to other cases

VEERA YADAV V. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR

Read the full judgement here
citation:

MANU/BH/1009/2022

court:

High Court of Patna

judges:

Sanjay Karol, C.J. and S. Kumar, J.

Facts:
A petition was filed highlighting the plight of the transgender community in the state of
Bihar during the COVID-19 pandemic where no rations were provided to transgender
persons.

Court Decision and Reasoning:
The Court noted that the State is under a constitutional as well as statutory obligation
to protect the transgender community from discrimination. It traced these rights to the
golden triangle of the Constitution (Articles 14, 19 and 21) as recognized in NALSA,
as well as statutory provisions like Section 8 of the Transgender Persons Act as per
which the State is obligated to secure full and effective participation of transgender
persons and Chapter IV of the Act under which the Government is obligated to initiate
welfare measures. The Court had in an interim order directed the State to consider
providing a one stop centre to address all the grievances of the transgender
community and also directed the government to consider recruitment of transgender
persons in the police force by creating a separate unit. A separate unit for transgender
persons was subsequently created at the district level. While the case was ongoing,
the State government began providing rations even where there was no ration card
and began the process of setting up facilitation centres at the district level which would
engage 2 members of the transgender community as a way of providing them some
avenue for employment. The government also filed a detailed affidavit noting the steps
taken for the welfare of transgender persons in the state including reservations in
public employment and education, sensitisation, and awareness programs, setting up
of HIV sero-surveillance centres, though it was observed that the sero-surveillance
centres were yet to be established and there was no clarity as to the steps that had
been taken to provide the benefit of reservation in education.

Significance:
This is an important ruling which drew attention to the State responsibilities to
introduce and implement welfare schemes for transgender persons, particularly in
times of crises.