Supreme Court Says Advisory Panel Has No Adjudicatory Powers, Revives Transgender Recruitment Plea

The case arises from a writ petition filed by a transgender candidate seeking multiple reliefs, including separate vacancies in teaching positions, relaxation in eligibility criteria such as age and qualifications, and reservation in public employment under the Government of NCT of Delhi.

The petitioner had also sought implementation of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 and the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020, along with correction of her gender and name details on the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board’s online portal.

The bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan noted that many of the broader issues raised in the petition had already been comprehensively addressed in its earlier judgment in Jane Kaushik v. Union of India, where binding directions were issued for implementation of transgender rights under the 2019 Act and Rules.

In that judgment, the Court had also constituted an advisory committee chaired by Justice (Retd.) Asha Menon to examine systemic issues such as equal opportunity policies, grievance redressal mechanisms, and inclusive healthcare for transgender persons.

However, the Court clarified that the advisory committee, which is still in the process of formulating recommendations, does not possess adjudicatory powers. “Prima facie, we are of the view that the High Court committed an error in disposing of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach the Advisory Committee,” the Court observed.

Focusing on the remaining grievance, the Bench indicated that the core issue requiring consideration is the absence of separate notifications for transgender vacancies and the lack of relaxation in eligibility conditions for public employment in Delhi. According to the petitioner, these gaps have effectively prevented her from competing for teaching posts.

The High Court had earlier disposed of the writ petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the advisory committee, noting that the Supreme Court was already seized of related issues in the Jane Kaushik case. It had reasoned that such an approach would avoid multiplicity of litigation. However, the Supreme Court has now signalled that such deferral may not be appropriate where enforceable legal rights are concerned.

Pending further consideration, the Supreme Court has granted interim relief to the petitioner by permitting her to apply for teaching vacancies under the transgender category, irrespective of the gender specified in the recruitment notification. This relief mirrors an earlier interim order passed by the High Court during the pendency of the writ proceedings.

The Court was also informed that the petitioner has already registered on the Online Application Registration System (OARS) portal, which facilitates applications for government posts.

Issuing notice returnable on May 14, 2026, the Court allowed service through standing counsel and permitted dasti service as well.