Justice GS Patel and Justice Neela Gokhale, who make up the division bench of the Bombay High Court, recently ordered the Maharashtra government to request that all educational institutions let transgender persons to alter their gender retroactively.
Such a rejection, according to the court, was against Article 21 of the Constitution.
“In our opinion, it amounts to nothing less than a rejection of the Petitioner’s basic rights under Article 21 in and of itself. What must be accepted is a progression in time and life, that is, what must be given to the petitioner starting at a certain period without having to travel back in time, the decision said.
The petitioner held an MA in Development Studies from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, and the court was considering his or her argument. According to the student’s name on the certificate, she was a girl. The petitioner changed his or her name and came out as transgender in 2015. The petitioner’s name was published in the gazette notice.
It was argued that the petitioner was entitled to a reissue of these papers under the petitioner’s current name and gender. A request was made to the institution, but no answer was received. The petitioner argued that there was no procedure for name changes.
It was a rejection of a human being’s self-identity and self-identification, the court said in its decision.
“In this instance, the self-identity and self-identification of a human being is denied. That is not acceptable and cannot be done. Additionally, an institution is not allowed to compel a name, identity, or gender that the petitioner has opted to reject in favor of another.
The petitioner must amend all other papers, the court has been advised. The HC said, “That is not even somewhat tenable. To deny the petitioner relief or to agree with the first respondent that all prior records must now be updated would be a clear violation of fundamental rights, such as the right to privacy and the right to dignity protected by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The high court then ordered the state government to instruct all Maharashtra educational institutions to make such amendments accessible through online forms.
“There is no excuse for any educational institution that is or is subject to our writ jurisdiction not to have a form for exactly such changes, i.e., marking a change in name and a change in gender, available on their website, including the 1st Respondent. The first respondent is responsible for making this adjustment on their website, and the second respondent’s state government is in charge of providing the appropriate guidance to all comparable educational institutions in Maharashtra, the court said.
