- Allowing the writ petition in the case of Saratha v State of Tamil Nadu, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras (HC) held that the State of Tamil Nadu’s decision to club the quota of transgender persons identifying themselves as ‘females’ together with the 30% reservation for women was in violation of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution and the direction of the Supreme Court contained in National Legal Services Authority v UOI.
- The writ was filed by Transgenders/ Third gender persons (TGs) seeking reservations, relaxations and concessions for the purpose of considering their candidatures in the recruitment process for the posts of Grade-II Police Constables and the like, conducted by the Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB).
- The Petitioners submitted that the concessions and relaxations provided to them in the aforementioned recruitment process were inconsistent with the orders passed by the Apex Court and amounted to hostile discrimination.
- Hearing the petition, the HC strongly recommended the provision of a special reservation of a specified percentage for TGs in public employments in addition to the relaxations and concessions extended to the socially and economically backward classes (EBCs).
- The Single Judge Bench of the HC quashed the disqualification of the petitioners from the recruitment process and directed the agency to treat all the petitioners qualified in the initial selection process, including the written examination with a direction to conduct physical measurement tests, endurance tests and physical efficiency tests, in accordance with the relaxed norms applicable for women candidates, for appointing them as Grade-II constables.
- The Judge, examining the judgment in Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board v Aradhana, further held that relaxation in age limit(from 29 to 45 years) for applying to the post could not be construed as ‘reservation’.
- On the issue of depriving transgender persons who recognised as ‘male’ from physical relaxations provided to female candidates, the Court observed that the same was also unconstitutional and failure to provide reservation to transgenders in the ‘male’ category was illegal and in violation of the NALSA (Supra) judgement.
- The Court observed that making the TGs identifying as ‘male’ to compete with the general candidates in the remaining 70% category, despite possessing the “Third Gender” certificate was a violation of their rights and unconstitutional.
"Loved reading this piece by Megha?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
