SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1149

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.S. RAMESH, J.
Saratha - Appellant
Versus
The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P. Nos. 15316 & 15376 of 2020 & 32618, 15911, 16549, 15920, 1163 & 33320 of 2019 & Connected Miscellaneous Petitions
Decided On : 02-03-2022

Important Points

The relaxations in the upper age limit for the TGs cannot be termed as a “reservation”, but rather a relaxation enabling them to fall within the zone of consideration and place them on par with the general category; clubbing the TGs who applied under the female category, along with the reservation for women candidates, infringes their fundamental right of equality before law and their right of equality of opportunity in public employments, as guaranteed under Article 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India and is therefore unconstitutional; the failure to provide any kind of reservation for the TGs in the male category and placing them on par with the general category candidates, is violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) and is not only unconstitutional, but is also illegal since it defies the direction to provide reservation in public employment, as ordered in NALSA; deprivation of the relaxations and concessions offered to female candidates in the physical measurement tests, endurance tests and physical efficiency tests to the TGs, who recognise themselves as “Male” or “Third Gender”, is arbitrary and unreasonable, apart from infringing their fundamental right under Article 16(1).

Subject

Constitutional Law - Reservation and Concessions

Act Referred

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.14, Art.15, Art.15(2), Art.15(4), Art.16, Art.16(1), Art.16(2), Art.16(4), Art.226, Art.38

Headnote

JUDGEMENT - [KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [ACT SECTION LIST] - [SUMMARY]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who are "Third Genders/ Transgenders" (TGs), filed writ petitions challenging the concessions and relaxations extended to them in the 2017-18, 2019 and 2020 Common Recruitment Processes for the posts of Grade-II Police Constables and the like, conducted by the Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), as inadequate and inconsistent with the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Court, which amounts to hostile discrimination. They sought reservations, relaxations and concessions for the purpose of considering their candidatures in the recruitment process.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the relaxations in the upper age limit for the TGs cannot be termed as a “reservation”, but rather a relaxation enabling them to fall within the zone of consideration and place them on par with the general category; clubbing the TGs who applied under the female category, along with the reservation for women candidates, infringes their fundamental right of equality before law and their right of equality of opportunity in public employments, as guaranteed under Article 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India and is therefore unconstitutional; the failure to provide any kind of reservation for the TGs in the male category and placing them on par with the general category candidates, is violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) and is not only unconstitutional, but is also illegal since it defies the direction to provide reservation in public employment, as ordered in NALSA; deprivation of the relaxations and concessions offered to female candidates in the physical measurement tests, endurance tests and physical efficiency tests to the TGs, who recognise themselves as “Male” or “Third Gender”, is arbitrary and unreasonable, apart from infringing their fundamental right under Article 16(1).

Issues: Whether the concessions and relaxations extended to the TGs in the 2017-18, 2019 and 2020 Common Recruitment Processes for the posts of Grade-II Police Constables and the like, conducted by the Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), were adequate and consistent with the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the following principles: * The term “reservation” is distinct from the terms “concession” and “relaxation”. While concession and relaxation are privileges extended to achieve “equality of opportunities” for a candidate to participate in a recruitment process, the term “reservation” is an accrued right of appointment among a specified number of reserved vacancies for the socially and economically backward candidates, to enable them to be adequately represented in the services of the State. * Reservations are a mode to achieve the equality of opportunity guaranteed under Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India. Concessions and relaxations in fee or age provided to the reserved category candidates to enable them to compete and seek benefit of reservation, is merely an aid to reservation. The concessions and relaxations place the candidates on a par with general category candidates. It is only thereafter the merit of the candidates is to be determined without any further concessions in favour of the reserved category candidates. * The State Government is directed to treat all the petitioners herein, as having qualified in the initial selection process, including the written examination and forthwith subject them to physical measurement tests, endurance tests and physical efficiency tests, in accordance with the relaxed norms applicable for Women candidates, for the purpose of appointing them as Grade-II Police Constables and complete such a process, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions and quashed the disqualification of the petitioners from the recruitment process for the posts of Grade-II Police Constables conducted by the TNUSRB for the years 2017-18, 2019 & 2020. The court also directed the Member Secretary of TNUSRB to treat all the petitioners herein, as having qualified in the initial selection process, including the written examination and forthwith subject them to physical measurement tests, endurance tests and physical efficiency tests, in accordance with the relaxed norms applicable for Women candidates, for the purpose of appointing them as Grade-II Police Constables and complete such a process, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:M/s. Jayna Kothari, Sr. Advocate, C. Prabhu, Advocate. For the Respondents: P. Kumaresan, AAG assisted by C. Selvaraj, AGP.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, quashing the Notification No.1/2020 dated 17.09.2020 issued by the respondent No.1 to the extent that it imposes an age limit of 29 years for transgender applicants for the post of Grade II Police Constable (AR) and quash the G.O.Ms No.245 dated 29.06.2020 issued by the Home (Police III) Department, the respondent No.4 and direct the respondents to issue a Corrigendum providing for relaxation of age limit to transgender applicants up to 45 years and provide the same concessions in the physical examination requirements and cut-off marks for the written examinations as provided to other reserved categories of applicants including destitute widows and ex-servicemen as held by this Court in the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board V. Aradhana Writ Appeal No.330 of 2018 dated 22.02.2018 ii) allow the petitioner to apply online for the post of Grade II Police Constable and be considered for the same, with all the above concessions and relaxation of conditions and iii)pass any other order in the interest of justice and equity.)

Common Order

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The grievances of the petitioners herein, who are the “Third Genders/ Transgenders” (TGs) in all these Writ Petitions, are that the concessions and relaxations extended to them in the 2017-18, 2019 and 2020 Common Recruitment Processes for the posts of Grade-II Police Constables and the like, conducted by the Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), are inadequate and inconsistent with the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court, which amounts to hostile discrimination. All these petitioners seek for reservations, relaxations and concessions for the purpose of considering their candidatures in the recruitment process.

3. In order to appreciate the claims made in these Writ Petitions, it would be significant to refer to the underlying chronicle of the facts, on which the claims are founded.

4. The rights of the TGs predominantly culminated from a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) V. Union of India and Others reported in 2014 (5) SCC 438. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while observing that our society seldom realize or cares to realize the trauma, agony and pain, which the members of the TG Community undergo, expressed its anguish and consequently had recognized and declared two of their important Constitutional rights, namely, the right of a person to get the recognition as “Male” or “Female” after “Sex Reassignment Surgery” (SRS), which was not only his/her/their gender characteristic but has become his/her/their physical form AND the right of the TG to beidentified and categorized as “Third Gender”, for safeguarding and enforcing their Constitutional rights.

5. Having declared these rights, the Hon’ble Apex Court had set out certain directions to the Centre and the State Governments, in the following manner:-

“135. We, therefore, declare:

135.1. Hijras, Eunuchs, apart from binary gender, be treated as “third gender” for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature.

135.2. Transgender persons’right to decide their self-identified gender is also upheld and the Centre and State Governments are directed to grant legal recognition of their gender identity such as male, female or as third gender.

135.3. We direct the Centre and the State Governments to take steps to treat them as socially and educationally backward classes of citizens and extend all kinds of reservation in cases of admission in educational institutions and for public appointments.

135.4. Centre and State Governments are directed to operate separate HIV Sero-surveillance Centres since Hijras/ Transgenders face several sexual health issues.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top