NATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY V.

UNION OF INDIA AND

ORS (2014)

Introduction:

National Legal Services Authority V. Union of India 1 is a Supreme Court (SC) landmark
judgment on Recognition of Transgender Rights in India. The case was decided on 15 th April,
2014 by a bench consisting of Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan and A. k. Sikri. The judgment is
concerned about the plight of transgender communities in India. The judgment confers a
redressal for the grievances of the Transgender community by providing a legal recognition or
legal declaration of the rights of the transgender community because non-recognition of their
rights amount to violation of Art 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India 2. Generally, in
India, the transgender people are deprived out of their basic rights. The transgender community
is composed of Hijras, Enunchs, Siv-Shakthis, Kothis, Aravanis, and Jogappas. The story of
transgender people are filled with pain, misery and agony. They are considered untouchables just
because they do not fit with the norms of society. Many times they are subjected to physical and
mental abuses. They are excluded from society and are denied proper education and other basic
needs. The transgender community has faced a lot of gender recognition problems in society.
Before, NALSA V. UOI judgment it is difficult for transgender people to get their grievances
redressed, due to improper recognition of their legal rights. It is because of this judgment the
rights of transgender community is protected and they are recognized as citizens of India.

Facts:

The case was started with the filling of two writ petitions, to safeguard and protect the rights of
the people from transgender communities, brought by ‘National Legal Services Authority
(NALSA)’ which was constituted under National Legal Services Authority Act 1997 and by
‘Poojya Mata Nasib Kaur Ji Women Welfare Society’, a registered association formed for
protecting the rights of the ‘Kinnar Transgender community’. And Lakshmi Narayan Tripathi,
who considered himself as a Hijra, approached the court to protect and safeguard his rights so

1
AIR 2014 SC 1863
2
Art 14- Equality before Law; Art 15- Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, sex, caste or place
of birth; Art 19- protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech etc.; Art 21- Protection of Life and
Personal Liberty.
that he and his community will not be discriminated against anymore, was also impleaded in this
case.

Issues:

The issues of the case were regarding recognition of gender identity and protection of the rights
and interests of the trans genders in society. The case was revolved around two particular issues.
They are:

1. Whether a person who is born as a male, but familiarizes himself as a female, has a right
to be recognized as female? The same question pops up when a person has undergone
surgery to change his/her sex.
2. Whether a person who has not identified himself/ herself either as male or female, can be
recognized as transgender?

Petitioner’s Argument:

The arguments of the petitioners were on seeking recognition of transgender rights in society.
They argued that non-recognition of transgender rights will amount to a violation of Art 14, 15,
19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. They further argued that non-recognition of transgender
rights led to abuse of individuals from transgender communities and deprivation of civil and
human rights. In short, the petitioner seeks redressal against discrimination by recognizing and
protecting the rights and interests of trans genders.

Respondent’s Argument:

The respondents argued that the state has set up an Expert Committee to research about the
issues relating to trans genders. And it also said that the Expert Committee was working forward
to sort out the issues faced by the trans genders. The respondents further contended that the
committee will also consider the contentions raised by the petitioners and the various states and
union territories in India were working for the betterment of the lives of Trans genders.

Judgment:

The court has upheld the rights and interests of the transgender communities. The court has
declared that Hijras, Enunchs should be treated as trans genders, apart from binary genders. The
court also declared that the trans genders have right to decided their genders. The Supreme Court
in the present case has relied upon the judgments of foreign courts from New Zealand, Malaysia,
Pakistan, Australia, and England. The Supreme Court also has set up some guidelines for Central
and State governments to protect the rights and interests of trans genders against discrimination.

The Supreme Court (SC) has directed the Central and State governments to:

1. Legally recognize the gender of a person as male, female or trans genders.

2. Take all essential steps to treat them as socially and educational oppressed sections of
the society and take steps to include them for reservation in educational institutions and
in public appointments.
3. Operate many HIV-Sero Surveillance Centers since many people from transgender
communities are facing sexual health issues.
4. Provide proper medical care to the trans genders in the hospitals and to provide separate
public toilets and restroom facilities for trans genders.
5. Take measures to create awareness about Trans genders among people so that they will
be considered as a part and parcel of the society.
6. Take measures to frame various social schemes for the welfare and betterment of Trans
genders.
7. Take measures to protect them from problems like fear, gender dysphoria, social
pressure and depression arose due to social stigma
8. Take measures to regain their self-respect which they enjoyed once in the society.

Analysis:

The word ‘Person’ in Art 14, 15, 19 and 21 of our Indian Constitution is gender-neutral. It
denotes everyone irrespective of their gender. The main motto of our Indian constitution is to
give equal protection to all without any sort of discrimination. The Part III of our Indian
constitution confers fundamental rights on its citizens and protects all persons irrespective of
their genders. Any person whose fundamental rights are violated can get relief under the
Constitution of India since it is a violation of their fundamental rights. Therefore, when the rights
and interests of trans genders are said to be violated, when they are deprived out of their civil
rights, when they are deprived out of their basic human rights and subjected to mental and
physical abuse and when they are deprived out of education, medical aid and employment, then
they can approach the court for redressal because it is a violation of fundamental rights conferred
under our Indian constitution and therefore their rights and interests should be protected.

Conclusion:

The judgment delivered by the SC in NALSA V. UOI is a new ray of hope for transgender
communities. The judgment of the Supreme Court will pave way for the betterment of the human
rights of transgender communities. To conclude, creating awareness about the transgender
communities among people by imparting basic education, will surely add more power to the
judgment and make society a better place for trans genders to live.

References;

1. https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/nalsa-case-2014-sc-judgements/
2. https://www.latestlaws.com/case-analysis/supreme-court-case-analysis-nalsa-v-union-of-
india-and-ors-transgenders-rights-case-by-lavina-bhargava/