The Supreme Court agreed to hear a case on allocating reservation for transgender students in higher medical institutes.
Petitioners argue that transgender candidates should receive horizontal quota benefits across categories as per the 2014 NALSA judgment.
Inconsistent rulings from various high courts have created confusion over eligibility and minimum qualifying scores for trans applicants.
Supreme Court to Hear Plea on Transgender Reservation in Medical Education
The court will examine whether transgender students should be granted horizontal quota benefits in postgraduate medical courses, following earlier rulings recognising their rights.
Summary
The Supreme Court agreed to hear a petition regarding the allocation of spots for transgender students in medical schools on September 18.
A panel made up of Justice K Vinod Chandran and Chief Justice B R Gavai stated that if a top court ruling was issued awarding quotas to transgender people, it should be obeyed.
Speaking on behalf of a few petitioners, senior counsel Indira Jaising stated that one of the concerns was whether or not the quota for third-gender individuals would be horizontal.
According to PTI, transgender people would receive the advantage of reservation under the horizontal quota because they belong to the third gender, regardless of whether they were in the SC, ST, OBC, or general categories.
In accordance with the historic 2014 NALSA ruling that acknowledged the rights of transgender individuals, including their right to affirmative action, Jaising pushed for the establishment of reservation benefits for transgender candidates in postgraduate medical programs.
According to the senior attorney, she was defending three applicants to postgraduate medical training programs.
PTI reported that the remaining candidates, who fall within the general and OBC categories, respectively, wish to take advantage of the quota benefits, she added, even though one of the petitioners has since attempted to withdraw the appeal.
Jaising claims that although both petitioners had taken the entrance tests, there was still uncertainty over the minimum scores needed to recognise transsexual reservations.
She cited inconsistent rulings from many high courts, some of which granted transgender candidates ad hoc reservations while others denied the relief.
Published At: