The Delhi High Court on Wednesday expressed strong disapproval at the Union Government’s delay in responding to petitions filed by transgender individuals seeking enforcement of their rights under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019. The bench of Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Anish Dayal made it clear that the Centre cannot indefinitely postpone its responsibility in such sensitive matters.
Background
Three separate petitions were clubbed before the court-filed by Riya Sharma, Aarav Singh, and Raghav P.R. All of them have either undergone a change of gender or identify as transgender and are demanding that their official documents reflect their true identity. They argued that the Transgender Persons Act, along with the 2020 Rules, clearly spells out the procedure for changing names, gender markers, and photographs in educational and government records.
The petitioners’ lawyers pointed out that despite statutory provisions, institutions such as CBSE and the University of Delhi have not updated records. “It is a basic right to have your identity recognised in documents,” counsel argued, urging the court to direct immediate compliance.
Court’s Observations
The bench noted that the petitioners relied on Rule 7(6) of the Rules, which ensures that any change in gender or name must be reflected in the same official documents without altering their reference numbers. They also cited guidelines from the National Institute of Social Defence, issued in October 2023, which recommended reissuing certificates incorporating changes.
The judges observed that the role of the National Council for Transgender Persons, created under Section 16 of the Act, was central to policy and implementation. However, it was unclear if the 2023 guidelines had been formally approved by the Council and accepted by the Central Government.
Most significantly, the Court criticised the Centre for its silence. “The least that was expected from the Central Government was to submit their response,” the bench remarked. The judges even hinted at imposing costs on the Secretary of the concerned ministry for ignoring the matter.
Decision
In the end, the Court refrained from imposing costs but granted the Union of India one last opportunity. It allowed four weeks for the Centre to file its response across all three petitions, regardless of whether it was formally a party to each case. The Court also directed that an advance copy of the reply must be shared with the petitioners’ lawyers, who can file their counter within two weeks.
The matter has now been listed for November 20, 2025.
Case: Riya Sharma vs Union of India & Ors. (along with connected petitions Aarav Singh vs Union of India & Anr. and Raghav P.R. vs Union of India & Ors.)
Case Numbers:
- W.P.(C) 6595/2017 & CM APPL. 27314/2017, CM APPL. 5527/2023 (Riya Sharma)
- W.P.(C) 2425/2019 & CM APPL. 11308/2019, CM APPL. 28379/2020 (Aarav Singh)
- W.P.(C) 2432/2019 & CM APPL. 11318/2019 (Raghav P.R.)
Date of Order: 17 September 2025
