In a significant hearing, the Delhi High Court on April 9, 2026, examined a set of petitions raising concerns about how transgender persons are identified in educational records. The court indicated that the issue could have far-reaching implications beyond schools and universities, extending to multiple official documents.
Background of the Case
The petitions, including Riya Sharma vs Union of India and connected matters, question the manner in which institutions like the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and the University of Delhi record the names and identities of transgender individuals.
Read also:- MP High Court Grants Bail in Instagram Reel Case, Says Content Doesn’t Prima Facie Promote Enmity
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Yashraj Singh Deora and other counsels argued that recognition of gender identity in official records must be consistent and respectful of individuals’ rights. The matter also touched upon recent legislative developments, particularly the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026.
Counsel for CBSE placed the amended definition of “transgender person” before the court, highlighting that the revised provision excludes persons with different sexual orientations and self-perceived sexual identities from its scope.
The bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain, noted that the issues raised are not limited to educational certificates. The court observed that any directions passed in the case could impact a wide range of official documents.
Read also:- Breaking: Supreme Court Stays Telangana HC Relief to Pawan Khera in Assam FIR Case
“The impact of the directions… could also extend to other areas of official documentation such as issuance of birth certificates, death certificates, passports, Aadhaar cards, driving licences and other official documents,” the bench observed.
The court also took note of the submissions regarding the Amendment Act. While the respondents relied on the amended definition, the petitioners pointed out that the amendment is yet to be notified and argued that their cases would still fall within its scope.
At the core of the dispute is how transgender identity is defined and recorded in institutional and government records. The court indicated that a uniform and legally sound approach is necessary, especially given the wide administrative consequences.
Recognising the importance of the issue, the bench stated that it would require the Union of India’s detailed position before proceeding further.
The High Court directed that the Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, be impleaded as a respondent in all the petitions.
It further ordered that the Ministry file its stand by way of an affidavit within six weeks. The court also allowed the Ministry to consult other departments if necessary to present a comprehensive response.
Read also:- Rajasthan High Court Orders Probe Into Wife’s Income in Maintenance Case, Sets Aside Trial Court Rejection
The parties have been directed to file their written submissions in advance, specifically addressing the implications of the recent amendment.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 15, 2026.
Case Details:
Case Title: Riya Sharma vs Union of India & Ors. and connected matters
Case Number: W.P.(C) 6595/2017 & connected petitions
Judge: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain
Decision Date: April 9, 2026
