The Kerala High Court, in a recent judgement, directed the state government to implement reservations for transgender persons within six months of the date of the order. A bench of Justices A Muhamed Mustaque and P Krishna Kumar issued the order on November 28, 2024, and it was uploaded to the High Court’s website only on January 14, 2025. The order followed a petition filed by Aneera Kabeer, a trans woman, who pointed out that the Kerala Public Service Commission was yet to implement reservations for trans persons. She sought a court directive to the state government to provide reservations in education and public employment.
The bench observed that though the state government had introduced various measures to
assist transgender persons since 2015, it has failed to develop policies to ensure reservations for them. The court stated that while it usually refrains from interfering in the policy domain, its judicial role becomes imperative in cases involving fundamental rights.
“The continued inaction by the Government, despite clear legal and constitutional obligations, leaves this Court with little choice but to consider issuing appropriate directions to ensure compliance with the constitutional and legal mandate,” the bench said, referencing the Supreme Court’s landmark judgement in the NALSA vs Union of India case. The 2014 ruling granted individuals the right to self-identify their gender and issued several directives for the welfare of trans persons, including the mandate that the states and the Union provide reservations to them.
The High Court bench noted that none of Kerala’s public employment notifications mentioned reservations for trans persons. “In the light of the Apex Court judgment in National Legal Service Authority’s case (supra), the Government cannot delay the implementation of their rights in providing reservations to them. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Government shall implement measures to provide reservations to transgender (person)s within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment,” the court ruled.