S. SUSHMA AND ORS. VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, GREATER CHENNAI POLICE AND ORS.

KEY FACTS: The Petitioners in this case are a lesbian couple. Both their parents opposed the relationship.The Petitioners fled to Chennai from their respective homes in Madurai because of the fear of getting separated. The parents of the Petitioners filed missing complaints for their respective daughters with the police. The police started interrogating the Petitioners […]

Read more

FAIZ ULLAH VS. P.P.S.C. AND ORS.

KEY FACTS: On 23rd August 2020, an advertisement was publicized by the Punjab Public Service Commision to call for applications for the posts of Lecturers. These applications were invited only under Male and Female categories. The Petitioner, being transgender, applied for the post under Female category in exercise of their option under Section 3 of […]

Read more

SWAPNA & ORS. v. CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS.

KEY FACTS: Swapna, Grace, Selvi, Living Smile Vidya & Selvam filed a petition for reservation in employment and education. This petition directed the respondents to permit transgender persons to appear in all examination under the category of female and transman under the category of male and create a separate class or group for Transgender people […]

Read more

MYRA GRACE BANDIKALLA V. AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ORS.

KEY FACTS: The petitioner is Myra Grace Bandikalla, a transwoman from Andhra Pradesh. She came to Mumbai in 2010 and since has been working as an Air Traffic Controller for the Airport Authority of India, the respondents in this case. Having been medically diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria, Myra has self-identified as female for many years. […]

Read more

SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR KAPPU VS. PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, DELHI POLICE

KEY FACTS Santosh Kumar, the petitioner filed an application under Right To Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of Delhi Police Head Quarters (PHQ). He requested the following information: Whether transgender persons’ begging in public places with or without misconduct is a cognizable offence or not. How many First Information Reports (FIRs) […]

Read more

RANO VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

KEY FACTS: Rano and Rajni Rawat Kinnar were transgender persons who filed separate petitions before the High court of Uttarakhand. The court adjudicated both the cases together as the issues were similar. The petitioners sought protection for their right to life and liberty from the court. ISSUES & DECISION: The issue before the Court was […]

Read more

DR. MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAKI VS. S.S.P, RAWALPINDI

KEY FACTS: Dr Mohammad Aslam Khaki, an Islamic scholar, filed a case on behalf of the transgender community. Khaki argued for legal recognition and equal treatment of transgender persons, under the Constitution of Pakistan. ISSUES:   The Constitution of Pakistan recognises the right to equal treatment of all citizens. It allows public authorities to make provisions […]

Read more

SUMITA KUMARI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

KEY FACTS: Sumita Kumari applied to be an ASHA Karmee/social worker. Sumita was a transgender woman who was unable to specify her gender as male or female. ASHA Karmee rejected her application for employment. She approached the court to argue against the prejudice she faced in the process of application. ISSUES AND DECISION: The Court considered whether […]

Read more

THE CHAIRMAN VS. ARADHANA

KEY FACTS: Aradhana, a transgender woman, filed a petition before High Court of Madras against an advertisement inviting applications for the post of Grade II constable. She argued that the advertisement did not allow a relaxation in the age limit of applications submitted by transgender persons. A single judge had passed an interim order, directing the Chairman of […]

Read more

MANJU VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

KEY FACTS:  Manju, a transgender woman, applied for the post of a police constable. Manju passed the written test and most activities in the physical test. However, she did not complete the 100-meter sprint within the required time limit. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services-Recruitment Board disqualified her. She approached the High Court challenging her disqualification. ISSUES:  The Court had […]

Read more

SANGEETA HIJRA VS. STATE OF BIHAR

KEY FACTS: Sangeeta Hijra, a transgender woman filed her nomination for ‘female unreserved’ seat to contest the Patna Municipal election in 2017. The Deputy Development Commissioner of Patna (the “commissioner”) issued an order rejecting her nomination. The order stated that Sangeeta Hijra was not eligible for the ‘female unreserved’ seat because she is a transgender person. […]

Read more

K. PRITHIKA YASHINI VS. CHAIRMAN, TAMIL NADU UNIFORMED SERVICES RECRUITMENT BOARD

KEY FACTS: K. Prithika Yashini was a transgender woman who applied for the post of Sub-Inspector. The selection process consisted of three steps: a written test, physical test and viva voce (oral examination). Despite the Supreme Court judgment in NALSA v Union of India, the application form for the selection did not account for “third gender” applicants. Prithika approached […]

Read more

GANGA KUMARI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

KEY FACTS: Ganga Kumari had applied for the post of a woman police constable. She was qualified and successfully cleared the written examination, physical efficiency tests and also underwent a medical examination. Despite being selected for the post, she was denied an appointment letter because the medical report termed her a “hermaphrodite”. After repeated unanswered […]

Read more

ATRI KAR VS. UNION OF INDIA

KEY FACTS:  Atri Kar was a transgender person who wished to participate in the selection process conducted by the State Bank of India (“SBI”) to recruit Probationary Officers. However, the application form did not contain a gender column for transgender applicants. The petitioner made a representation to SBI. It did not elicit any response. The […]

Read more

FAIZAN SIDDIQUI VS. SASHASTRA SEEMA BAL

KEY FACTS:  Faizan Siddiqui, the petitioner, was diagnosed with a congenital anomaly named Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome and a Disorder of Sexual Differentiation (DSD). This meant that despite being born male, her body was not responsive to male hormones. Hence, she identified as female. She underwent surgery at a young age to remove her testes, followed […]

Read more

NANGAI-III VS. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

KEY FACTS: Nangai-III was selected for the post of grade II woman police constable. Before her deputation, the recruitment board (“the board”) asked her to undergo a medical examination. The examination revealed the absence of uterus in her body. Based on the medical examination report, “the board”  declared Nangai-III as a transgender person and revoked […]

Read more

NANGAI-II VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

KEY FACTS: Nangai-II (name changed) was assigned female at birth. She was selected for the post of a woman police constable. She went through a medical check-up which included a gender test during her training. The results declared her as a “Pseudo-Hermaphrodite” or “transsexual”. Consequently, the Vice Principal of the Police Recruitment School asked her […]

Read more

NANGAI VS. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

KEY FACTS: Nangai (name changed) was assigned and registered as female at birth. Nangai’s documents, including her birth certificate, medical records, family card and census data to the records at the all-girls’ school and women’s college she attended, all identify her as female. In 2009, she appeared for the selection process of Grade II Police […]

Read more

NATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (NALSA) VS. UNION OF INDIA

KEY FACTS:  This case was filed by the National Legal Services Authority of India (NALSA) to legally recognize persons who fall outside the male/female gender binary, including persons who identify as “third gender”. ISSUES & DECISION:  The Court had to decide whether persons who fall outside the male/female gender binary can be legally recognised as […]

Read more