New Delhi, October 20, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The Supreme Court has sought a response from the Delhi government on the exclusion of transgender persons from recruitment notifications for teaching posts, questioning the legal basis for classifying vacancies exclusively for male and female candidates.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran directed the respondents to file their affidavits within 15 days, raising questions about the recruitment framework followed by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB).
The Bench asked whether the applicable rules require teaching vacancies to be advertised separately for male and female candidates and, if so, what objective such a classification serves. It also sought clarification on whether the authorities intend to include the third gender in future recruitment notifications and how transgender applicants would be accommodated in public employment.
The proceedings include a recent petition filed by Praveen Singh concerning transgender persons’ access to government jobs and age relaxation. The matter also relates to a petition filed by Jane Kaushik challenging a December 18, 2025, judgment of the Delhi High Court.
Kaushik had sought separate vacancies for transgender persons in teaching positions, relaxation in minimum educational qualifications and age limits, and a dedicated recruitment policy for transgender candidates seeking government employment.
In an earlier order, the Supreme Court observed that the High Court had, prima facie, erred in disposing of her petition by asking her to approach an advisory committee, noting that the committee did not have adjudicatory powers.
The apex court had also permitted Kaushik to apply for vacancies under the transgender category, irrespective of the gender specified in the recruitment advertisement. This relief continued the protection previously granted by the Delhi High Court while her writ petition remained pending.
Kaushik had argued that although she was registered on the DSSSB’s Online Application Registration System (OARS) portal, she could face exclusion at the appointment stage because recruitment advertisements categorised applicants as either male or female.
The Supreme Court had previously noted that several other issues raised in the case were covered by its judgment in Jane Kaushik v. Union of India, concerning implementation of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, and the rules framed under it.
The court had also constituted an advisory committee headed by former Justice Asha Menon to examine a range of concerns affecting transgender persons, including equal opportunity policies, reasonable accommodation, grievance redressal, changes in gender and name records, inclusive medical care and safeguards for gender-diverse individuals.
The latest directions seek clarification from the authorities on the recruitment rules and the practical arrangements for ensuring transgender persons can access teaching vacancies in government employment.
FOLLOW NOW
