HC ruling empowers transgender rights, orders education board to consider amendment in rules

Dehradun: In a landmark judgement, the Uttarakhand high court overturned a state education board decision that had refused to alter the name and gender in a transgender individual’s educational certificates. The verdict was delivered on Wednesday by a single bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari in Dehradun.

The petitioner, Shreyansh Singh Bisht, previously known as Seema Bisht, underwent sexual reassignment surgery in 2020 and subsequently legally changed his name and gender. However, despite these changes being officially recognised in documents such as his Aadhaar card and through a certificate issued by the district magistrate, the Uttarakhand School Education Board rejected his request to update his educational certificates, citing that the request did not fall under the provisions of Regulation 27. Bisht completed Class X and XII in 2006 and 2008, respectively.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the board’s refusal was baseless, stating, “The name and gender of the petitioner have already been legally changed and recognised in official documents. The district magistrate has exercised his statutory powers to issue a certificate and identification card to the petitioner. Therefore, the board’s rejection of this application is unsustainable.” He pointed out that the only justification provided by the board was that the petitioner’s request did not meet the criteria under Regulation 27, which addresses cases where a name is obscene, abusive, or disrespectful.

On the other hand, the counsel for the education board argued, “The petitioner’s request for a change of name and gender could not be accepted as the existing regulations only permit changes when a name is deemed obscene, abusive, or disrespectful, which is not the situation here.”

In examining the case, the court referred to the landmark Supreme Court judgement in National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India (2014), which affirmed the right of transgender individuals to self-identify their gender and mandated legal recognition of this identity. Justice Tiwari noted that the current regulations of the Uttarakhand school education board were formulated before this decision and the enactment of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, and do not reflect the legal protections now granted to transgender persons.

Justice Tiwari also cited the Karnataka HC’s ruling in Jeeva M vs State of Karnataka, stressing that state authorities should not force transgender individuals to repeatedly seek court intervention for document changes following gender reassignment. “It is against the public interest and the spirit of the Transgender Persons Act, 2019, for the state govt to delay amending outdated regulations,” he stated. He added, “Regulation 27 cannot remain static. The Uttarakhand school education board has acknowledged the rights of transgender persons and has already submitted a proposal to amend these regulations, but the state govt has been unduly slow in responding.”

The court quashed the board’s rejection order dated Aug 18, 2021, allowing the petition and instructing the school education department secretary to decide on the proposed amendments to Regulation 27 in line with the Transgender Persons Act, 2019, within three weeks. The board was directed to promptly reconsider the petitioner’s application after this decision.

Courtesy:  Times Of India

Note: This news was originally published in  timesofindia.indiatimes.com  and is used solely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes especially for human rights.