[ad_1]
DEHRADUN: In a landmark judgment, the Uttarakhand high court overturned a state education board decision that refused to alter name and gender in a transgender individual’s educational certificates. The verdict was delivered on Wednesday by a single bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari in Dehradun.
Petitioner Shreyansh Singh Bisht, previously Seema Bisht, underwent sexual reassignment surgery in 2020 & subsequently legally changed his name & gender.However, despite these changes being officially recognised in documents such as his aadhaar card and through a certificate issued by district magistrate, Uttarakhand school education board rejected his request to update his educational certificates, citing that the request did not fall under provisions of Regulation 27.
The petitioner’s counsel argued, “Name and gender of the petitioner have already been legally changed and recognised in official documents. District magistrate has exercised his statutory powers to issue a certificate and identification card to the petitioner. Thus, the board’s rejection of this plea is unsustainable.”
He pointed out that the only justification provided by the board was that the petitioner’s request did not meet the criteria under Regulation 27, which addresses cases where a name is obscene, abusive, or disrespectful.
On the other hand, counsel for the education board argued, “The petitioner’s request could not be accepted as the existing regulations only permit changes when a name is deemed obscene, abusive, or disrespectful, which is not the situation here.”
In examining the case, the court referred to the landmark SC judgment in NLSA vs Union of India (2014), which affirmed right of transgender individuals to self-identify their gender and mandated legal recognition of this identity.
The court quashed the board’s rejection order dated Aug 18, 2021, allowing the petition and instructing the school education department secretary to decide on the proposed amendments to Regulation 27 in line with Transgender Persons Act, 2019, within three weeks. The board was directed to promptly reconsider the petitioner’s application after this decision.
Petitioner Shreyansh Singh Bisht, previously Seema Bisht, underwent sexual reassignment surgery in 2020 & subsequently legally changed his name & gender.However, despite these changes being officially recognised in documents such as his aadhaar card and through a certificate issued by district magistrate, Uttarakhand school education board rejected his request to update his educational certificates, citing that the request did not fall under provisions of Regulation 27.
The petitioner’s counsel argued, “Name and gender of the petitioner have already been legally changed and recognised in official documents. District magistrate has exercised his statutory powers to issue a certificate and identification card to the petitioner. Thus, the board’s rejection of this plea is unsustainable.”
He pointed out that the only justification provided by the board was that the petitioner’s request did not meet the criteria under Regulation 27, which addresses cases where a name is obscene, abusive, or disrespectful.
On the other hand, counsel for the education board argued, “The petitioner’s request could not be accepted as the existing regulations only permit changes when a name is deemed obscene, abusive, or disrespectful, which is not the situation here.”
In examining the case, the court referred to the landmark SC judgment in NLSA vs Union of India (2014), which affirmed right of transgender individuals to self-identify their gender and mandated legal recognition of this identity.
The court quashed the board’s rejection order dated Aug 18, 2021, allowing the petition and instructing the school education department secretary to decide on the proposed amendments to Regulation 27 in line with Transgender Persons Act, 2019, within three weeks. The board was directed to promptly reconsider the petitioner’s application after this decision.
[ad_2]
Source link