Supreme Court Awards Compensation To Transwoman Teacher Dismissed Over Gender Identity; Forms Committee On Transgender Rights

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

17 Oct 2025 11:08 AM IST

  • Supreme Court Awards Compensation To Transwoman Teacher Dismissed Over Gender Identity; Forms Committee On Transgender Rights
    Listen to this Article

    The Supreme Court, in a significant pronouncement on transgender rights, has awarded compensation to a transwoman whose services as a teacher were terminated by two private schools, one in Uttar Pradesh and another in Gujarat, within a year, on the ground of her gender identity.

    The Court noted that not only the institutions but the respective States failed to comply with the provisions of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 and the The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020. Through their omission, the States and the respective ministries committed omissive discrimination.

    "We recognize that though private parties are duty-bound under the 2019 Act and 2020 Rules to uphold and promote the fundamental rights that these enactments seek to horizontally apply, yet it cannot, as a matter of course, be expected from private institutions to comply with provisions that do not find strict implementation by the State.

    In the present case, the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Union and State Ministry of Education as well as the Union and State Ministry of Social Justice, and the Central Board of Secondary Education, ought to have ensured that the provisions of the 2019 Act and the Rules thereto are abided by. By failing to do so, the State has committed omissive discrimination against the members of the transgender community."

    The Court noted that one of the provisions of the 2019 Act requires the establishment to appoint a complaint officer as a grievance redressal mechanism to address the issue of discrimination. However, both two schools did not have a complaint officer.

    "Further, the Second School also failed to comply with the necessary provisions of the 2019 Act, which required them to appoint a complaint officer to allow the petitioner to raise her grievance. As we have mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment, such failure reflects not only negligence on part of the private party but more importantly gross apathy and omission on part of the State authorities."

    The Court found that although the first school did not discriminate against her based on her gender identity but did fail to comply with the 2019 Act, the second school specifically discriminated against her by not issuing an employment letter. In view of this, the Court directed second school to pay her Rs. 50,000 as compensation. It has directed the Union, State of Uttar Pradesh and State of Gujarat to also pay her compensation of Rs. 50,000 each.

    "In such view of the matter, we are inclined to award compensation of Rs 50,000/- to the Petitioner, payable by the Second School. Moreover, we also direct the Union of India to pay a sum of Rs 50,000/- to the Petitioner by way of compensation for failure to provide the relevant mechanism which disabled her to seek appropriate redressal. Likewise, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3-States respectively are also directed to pay a sum of Rs 50,000/- each to the Petitioner. "

    Court appoints Committee to undertake reforms in transgender rights

    The Court also constituted a Committee to be headed by Justice Asha Menon, retired judge of the Delhi High Court, to formulate an equal opportunity policy for the protection of the rights of transgender persons.

    A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan pronounced the judgment in a writ petition filed by Jane Kaushik, who was dismissed from service on account of her transgender identity.

    "We have formulated guidelines till the Government comes out with a policy document. If any establishment does not have guidelines, we have prescribed that you will follow these guidelines till the Union comes out with policy," Justice Pardiwala said.

    "We have also awarded compensation for the way she was handled, and her services were terminated. We have taken serious cognisance of that," Justice Pardiwala added.

    The other members of the Committee will be Akai Padmashali, Karnataka-based transrights activist; Grace Banu, Dalit rights and trans rights activist; Vyjayanthi Vasanta Mogli, Telangana-based trans rights activist; Gaurav Mandal, Associate Professor at Jindal Global University; Nithya Rajshekhar, Senior Associate at Centre for Law & Policy, Bengaluru; and Dr Sanjay Sharma, retired Chief Executive Officer of Association for Transgender Health in India.

    Ex officio members will be the Secretary of Social Justice and Empowerment, Secretary of the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Secretary of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, and Secretary of the Ministry of Education.

    The remit of the Committee

    1. Formulation of equal opportunity policy

    2. Study of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 Act and 2020 Rules

    3. Reasonable Accommodation

    4. Grievance redressal mechanism

    5. Gender and name change sex

    6. Inclusive medical care for transgender and gender diverse persons

    7. Protection for gender non-conforming and gender diverse persons

    After the pronouncement of the judgment, Justice Pardiwala hoped that these guidelines can go a long way for securing the rights of transgender persons in India.

    In the landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India &Ors(2014), a bench of Justice KS Radhakrishnan and Jusyice AK Sikri legally recognised the third gender. It was observed that the non-existence of law recognizing transgender as a third gender could not be continued as a ground to discriminate against them in availing equal opportunities in education and employment. Thereafter, in 2019, Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act was implemented.

    Case Details: JANE KAUSHIK v UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 1405/2023

    Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1018

    Click Here To Read/Download Judgment


    Next Story