The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on the Centre’s plea seeking transfer of all petitions challenging the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, from various High Courts to a single forum. The Court also ordered an immediate stay on proceedings pending before different High Courts across the country.
The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana.
Background of the Case
The Union Government moved the Supreme Court through transfer petitions seeking consolidation of challenges pending before the Rajasthan, Karnataka, Kerala and Delhi High Courts. Several petitions have questioned the constitutional validity of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026.
The petitioners argue that the amendment weakens protections recognised in the landmark NALSA judgment of 2014, which upheld the right of transgender persons to self-identify their gender. Some petitions also challenge provisions relating to certification requirements and changes in the statutory definition of a transgender person.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had already issued notice in separate writ petitions directly challenging the amendment law.
Appearing for the Union Government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged the Court to transfer all related cases and hear them together. He submitted that the constitutional validity of a Central law was already under consideration before the Supreme Court.
Mehta also requested that if the cases are transferred to the Supreme Court, they may be placed before a three-judge bench.
Referring to the NALSA ruling, he told the Court, “There is one judgment of NALSA, so kindly issue notice. High Courts may find it difficult to take a view contrary to that.”
During the proceedings, one petitioner opposing the transfer argued that the challenge to the amendment was not based solely on the NALSA judgment and raised broader constitutional and medical concerns.
The Chief Justice responded positively to the intervention, remarking, “We will definitely require your assistance.”
Court’s Observations
The bench indicated that allowing multiple courts to hear identical constitutional questions could lead to differing views.
Observing that a common forum would be preferable,
the Chief Justice said, “Better it is that all the matters are taken up. Either we will give it to one High Court or we ourselves will decide instead of having a scattered opinion.”
The Court noted that it would consider whether the cases should be transferred to the Supreme Court itself or consolidated before one designated High Court.
Decision
After hearing the parties, the Supreme Court issued notice on the Centre’s transfer petitions.
In its interim order, the bench directed that all proceedings relating to challenges against the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, pending before various High Courts shall remain stayed until further orders.
Case Details:
Case Title: Union of India v. Nai Bhor Sanstha & Ors.
Case Number: T.P.(C) No. 1686-1692/2026
Judge: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana
Decision Date: June 15, 2026
 Sanjay Prasad, IAS-300x169.webp)
 Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act)-300x169.webp)
