SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 2562

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
The President. N.D. Mohan, Nainarkuppam Village Panchayath, Nainarkuppam, Cuddalore – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Cuddalore & Others – Respondents
W.P.No. 23963 of 2023
Decided On : 23-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:R. Rajavelavan, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1 to R4, T. Arun Kumar, Additional Government Pleader, R5, E. Sundaram, Government Advocate.

The judgment establishes the legal principle of prohibiting discrimination against transgender persons, recognizing their rights and protections under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, and emphasizing the need for their inclusion in mainstream society.

Headnote:

Transgender Rights - Discrimination - Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, Chapter VI - Section 3, Section 18

Fact of the Case:

The President of Nainarkuppam Village Panchayat filed a writ petition seeking to prevent the grant of patta to transgender persons in their village, citing concerns about the impact on the local culture and community. The petitioner later chose to withdraw the writ petition, but the court refused to allow withdrawal, emphasizing the importance of protecting constitutional mandates and the rights of transgender persons.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the resolution passed by the Village Panchayat discriminated against transgender persons and constituted a social evil. It directed the District Collector to take action to remove the President and Members of the Village Panchayat, ensure the grant of free house site patta to transgender persons, and facilitate their participation in village festivals and religious activities. Additionally, the court directed the Government of Tamil Nadu to initiate steps for granting reservations to transgender persons in local body elections.

Issues: The issues involved included discrimination against transgender persons, the legality of the resolution passed by the Village Panchayat, and the withdrawal of the writ petition by the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the prohibition against discrimination under Section 3 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, and the protections guaranteed under Chapter VI of the Act. It also highlighted the importance of recognizing transgender persons as a third gender, as established by the Supreme Court in the National Legal Services Authority case. The court underscored the need to address social injustice and promote the inclusion of transgender persons in mainstream society.

Final Decision: The court rejected the relief sought in the writ petition, directed the removal of the Village Panchayat members, mandated the grant of patta to transgender persons, and instructed the Government to initiate steps for granting reservations to transgender persons in local body elections.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to dispose of the petition dated 29.05.2023 filed by the petitioner on behalf of the Villagers as President of Nainarkuppam Village Panchayath relating to the property comprised in Survey No.166/10 of Karunkuzhi Revenue Village.)

“IT IS IMPORTANT TO TREAT OTHERS IN THE SAME WAY AS WE LIKE TO BE TREATED”.

The resolution dated 7th April, 2023 passed by Nainarkuppam Village Panchayat and the representation sent by the writ petitioner to the District Collector, dated 18.08.2023, provided cause for the institution of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. The President, Nainarkuppam Village Panchayat, Cuddalore District is the petitioner and states that no patta shall be granted to the Transgender persons (transmen or transwomen) in their Village. The petitioner along with the village people, in their representation, has stated that allowing Transgender persons in the Village will result in destruction of culture in that locality. Nearby the land proposed to be allotted to the Transgender persons by the District Collector, a Bus Stand situates, where from, School and College going children will get affected. Nearby the said proposed land, village people are residing and in the event of allowing the Transgender persons to reside in that locality, the same would be detrimental to the future life of the youngsters in the Village. Therefore, the writ petitioner / President, Village Panchayat, requested the District Collector not to grant patta to the Transgender persons in their Village.

3. This Court passed an interim order directing the petitioner to produce the copy of the Resolution passed by the Village Panchayat. The petitioner produced the copy of the Resolution along with an affidavit, stating that the 1st respondent / District Collector, Cuddalore District issued a show cause notice on 16.08.2023 and the petitioner has given a reply on 18.08.2023.

4. The petitioner has stated that he has chosen to withdraw the writ petition. The objectionable Resolution was passed without knowing the Rights of the Transgender persons. Admittedly, the 1st respondent issued a show cause notice under Section 46(1)(a) and the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. However, the petitioner has raised an objection stating that patta has been granted to houseless poor citizens of the Village by the Government to the inhabitants of the particular Village, based on the identity records like Voters list, Family Card, Aadhar Card etc. Therefore, the case of the Transgenders cannot be considered for grant of free house site patta even under the Government Schemes. It is apparent that on receipt of the show cause notice from the District Collector, the petitioner has offered to withdraw the present writ petition.

5. Social evil in any form is unconstitutional and the resolution passed by a Village Panchayat unanimously cannot be taken in a lighter manner. Allowing the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition would result in acceptance of the social evil caused at the instance of the elected body. The Constitutional Courts are failing in its duty to protect the Constitutional Mandates, Philosophy and Ethos, if the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the writ petition. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to walk away simply by withdrawing the writ petition filed seeking a direction to the District Collector not to grant patta to the Transgender persons in their Village under the Government schemes.

6. Section 3 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, enumerates prohibition against discrimination, which reads as under:

“No person or establishment shall discriminate against a transgender person on any of the following grounds, namely:

(a) the denial, or discontinuation of, or unfair

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top