Can Passport Authorities Demand Fresh Medical Test Despite Transgender ID Certificate? Allahabad High Court Says No

The Allahabad High Court has held that passport authorities cannot insist on a fresh medical examination or additional documentation once a transgender person has obtained a valid certificate of identity under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 from the District Magistrate.

The division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Siddharth Nandan disposed of the writ petition filed by Khush R Goel, who was born female but later his parents realised that the child was a transgender.

The petitioner subsequently invoked Sections 5 and 6 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, which provide for an application to the District Magistrate for issuance of a certificate of identity as a transgender person.

After following the prescribed procedure, the District Magistrate issued a certificate and identity card under Rule 6 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020 read with Section 7 of the 2019 Act. Upon attaining majority, the petitioner underwent gender reassignment surgery and transitioned to male. A revised certificate was thereafter issued by the District Magistrate reflecting the petitioner’s gender as ‘male’.

Clause 5 of the certificate clearly stated: “This certificate entitles the holder to change name and gender in all official documents of the holder”.

However, by an order dated June 23, 2025, passport authorities directed the petitioner to undergo a fresh medical examination from a clinic empanelled with them. The passport authorities also contended before the court that the petitioner would first have to change the name and gender in the birth certificate to enable amendment in the passport.

Challenging this order, counsel for the petitioner argued that the insistence on further medical examination and additional documentation was contrary to the special statute enacted to protect the rights of transgender persons.

The high court agreed. It observed that the impugned order was in violation of the special Act and the certification issued thereunder. Referring to the statement of objects and reasons of the 2019 Act, court noted that the legislation was enacted to protect transgender persons from discrimination and to secure their dignity and equal rights.

The bench emphasised that Sections 5 and 6 of the Act lay down the procedure for obtaining a certificate of identity, and Section 7 provides for change of gender upon submission of a medical certificate after surgery. In the present case, the process contemplated by the Act and the Rules had been duly followed, and a revised certificate had been issued by the District Magistrate.

Court held that the expression “all official documents” in Clause 5 of the certificate would include documents issued by the State or its instrumentalities for the purpose of establishing identity under statutory provisions. A passport, being issued in the exercise of a sovereign function, fell within that category.

It further noted that the passport is also included in Annexure 1 to Schedule 2 of the Rules. In light of the statutory scheme and the documents already issued by the District Magistrate, court concluded that there was no requirement for the petitioner to produce any further documents before the passport authorities as proof of identity and gender.

Terming the objections raised by the respondents as lacking firm legal foundation, court directed the passport authority to act and issue the passport in the light of the identity card and certificate already placed on record. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.

Case Title: Khush R Goel vs. Union Of India And 3 Others

Order Date: February 10, 2026

Bench: Justices Atul Sreedharan and Siddharth Nandan