Supreme Court Issues Notice in Jane Kaushik v. Lieutenant Governor, NCT of Delhi: A Significant Development on Transgender Reservations in Public Employment

Add a comment

In a notable development concerning the rights of transgender persons in public employment, the Supreme Court of India on 10 April 2026 issued notice in SLP(C) No. 12480/2026 titled Jane Kaushik v. Lieutenant Governor, NCT of Delhi & Ors. The Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.V. Viswanathan prima facie observed that the Delhi High Court erred in disposing of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach the Advisory Committee constituted by the Supreme Court, as the Committee lacks adjudicatory powers.

Background of the Petition

Jane Kaushik, a transgender woman, had approached the Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) No. 3401/2022 seeking multiple reliefs, including:

  • Notification of separate vacancies for transgender persons in teaching positions in schools;
  • Necessary relaxations in minimum qualifications and age criteria for transgender candidates;
  • Framing of a comprehensive Equal Opportunity Policy for recruitment of transgender persons in all Government of NCT of Delhi appointments;
  • Full implementation of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 (“TPPR Act”) and the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020 (“TPPR Rules”);
  • Permission to amend her registration details on the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board’s Online Application Registration System (OARS) to reflect her legal gender and name; and
  • Reservation for transgender persons in all public appointments.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner had also filed a writ petition under Article 32 before the Supreme Court in 2023, which resulted in the landmark judgment Jane Kaushik v. Union of India, reported as 2026 (1) SCC 336. In that judgment, the Supreme Court issued several binding directions for implementation of the TPPR Act and Rules across the country and constituted an Advisory Committee chaired by Justice (Retd.) Ms. Asha Menon to study and recommend on critical issues such as formulation of an Equal Opportunity Policy, reasonable accommodation, grievance redressal, gender and name change, inclusive medical care, and protections for gender non-conforming persons.

Delhi High Court’s Order

The High Court disposed of the writ petition observing that the Supreme Court was already seized of the broader issues and had permitted the Advisory Committee to consider even suggestions beyond the referred issues. It granted liberty to the petitioner (and other stakeholders, including transgender persons) to approach the Advisory Committee for redressal of grievances, citing the principle of avoidance of multiplicity of litigation.

Supreme Court’s Prima Facie View

The Supreme Court, while admitting the Special Leave Petition for hearing, made the following key observations:

  1. Several issues raised by the petitioner had already been exhaustively addressed in the earlier judgment Jane Kaushik (supra).
  2. The only surviving issue appears to be the lack of notifications for separate vacancies for transgender persons and relaxation in minimum eligibility requirements by the Government of NCT of Delhi in teaching positions.
  3. The High Court prima facie committed an error in directing the petitioner to approach the Advisory Committee, since the Committee “possesses no adjudicatory powers.”
  4. Accordingly, notice has been issued, returnable on 14.05.2026.

Interim Relief Granted

Importantly, the Supreme Court granted immediate practical relief to the petitioner:

  • The petitioner has already registered on the OARS Portal of the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board.
  • Reiterating the earlier order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court on 20.01.2023, the Supreme Court directed that the petitioner shall be permitted to apply under the category of “transgender” for all teaching vacancies, ignoring the gender mentioned in the respective notifications.
  • This interim direction will continue during the pendency of the present SLP.

Dasti service was permitted, and liberty was granted to serve notice through the Standing Counsel for the Government of NCT of Delhi.

Significance of the Order

This order assumes great importance for the following reasons:

  • It clarifies the limited mandate of the Advisory Committee constituted in Jane Kaushik (supra) — it is recommendatory in nature and cannot substitute judicial adjudication.
  • It reinforces the justiciability of specific implementation issues concerning transgender reservations and relaxations in public employment at the state level, even after the broader policy directions have been issued by the Supreme Court.
  • The interim relief ensures that transgender candidates are not prejudiced during the recruitment process while the larger questions are pending adjudication.
  • It signals the Supreme Court’s continued commitment to substantive equality and effective implementation of the TPPR Act, 2019, beyond mere policy formulation.

Way Forward

The matter is now listed for further hearing on 14 May 2026. The final outcome is likely to have far-reaching implications on:

  • Whether state governments are obligated to notify separate or horizontal reservations for transgender persons in public employment;
  • The extent of relaxations permissible in age, qualifications, and other eligibility criteria; and
  • The enforceability of the TPPR Act’s provisions in the absence of specific state-level policies.

CLICK HERE to access the ORDER.

Leave a comment