Karnataka High Court Hears Plea Challenging Cisgender Male Fitness Standards for Transgender Candidates in Police Recruitment
They have also filed a separate petition challenging denial of opportunity for transgender candidates during recruitment to certain police forces, including Karnataka State Reserve Police.
Seven transgender persons have filed petitions in the Karnataka High Court challenging the alleged exclusion of transgender candidates from recruitment processes and the lack of physical standards and endurance-test relaxations provided for transgender candidates.
In one petition, the petitioners have challenged a 2022 recruitment notification issued for Armed Police Constable posts, which required transgender candidates to compete under a separate category of “Male Transgender” candidates and purported to apply physical standards prescribed for cisgender male candidates to them.
Aspirants file PIL in Karnataka HC challenging denial of opportunity for transpersons during recruitment to Police Forces
Petitions filed by transgender persons in Karnataka High Court seek physical eligibility test relaxations for transgender recruitment aspirants and challenge exclusion from certain forces
THE TIMELY TRUTH/TRUTH+
Sept 18, 2023
NEW DELHI: Seven transgender persons have filed petitions in the Karnataka High Court challenging the alleged exclusion of transgender candidates from recruitment processes and the lack of physical standards and endurance-test relaxations provided for transgender candidates.
The same petitioners have also filed a separate plea challenging the exclusion of transgender candidates from recruitment to certain police forces, including Karnataka State Reserve Police.
One petition questions a 2022 recruitment notification issued for Armed Police Constable posts while the other plea challenges a government direction which excluded trans persons from recruitment to certain police forces altogether.
The petitions have been filed by Vikash J, Jagdish Uday Bodki, Girish CM, Dileep K, Shivraj M Nayakodi, Shashikumar and Devindrappa against the State of Karnataka and various police recruitment authorities.
While raising related questions about the implementation of reservation for transgender persons and physical eligibility criteria applicable to candidates appearing for the recruitment examinations, the petitions seek appropriate reliefs from the Court.
One petition questions a 2022 recruitment notification that required transgender applicants to compete under a separate category of “Male Transgender” candidates and meet physical standards prescribed for cisgender male candidates in recruitment to Armed Police Constables posts.
The plea challenges Notification No. 445 dated September 12, 2022, issued by the police recruitment authorities for the purpose of recruiting Armed Police Constables.
The petitioners had applied under the category of “Male Transgender” candidates, wrote the written examination and qualified. However, they were disqualified when they appeared for tests on physical standards and physical endurance criteria.
They have challenged the manner in which recruitment was conducted and the recruitment notification for creating a separate category of “Male Transgender” candidates instead of allowing transgender persons to exercise their right to horizontal reservation for trans candidates by providing for an “Others” category.
In this regard, the petitioners have relied upon Rule 9(1D) of the Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977, which was inserted through an amendment in 2021.
The Rule clearly provides for one per cent horizontal reservation for transgender persons to be exercised across General Merit, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes categories with a separate category of “Others” to be provided in recruitment application forms.
The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal previously dismissed their applications filed in the matter through a common order dated June 2, 2026.
In that order, the Tribunal had held that physical standards prescribed for recruitment to the posts of Armed Police Constables could not be relaxed merely because the candidates belonged to transgender community.
The petitioners have now come to the High Court challenging this order and arguing that the government examined them only under the same physical standards prescribed for cisgender male candidates without applying any separate standards or relaxed standards for transmen.
They have argued that allowing transgender persons to apply for a recruitment process is not a meaningful exercise of transgender reservation if the trans candidates are then subject to the same physical standards that are required to be met by cisgender men without determining whether separate standards ought to be applied to transmen or if any relaxations were to be provided.
The petition details the minimum height requirements and physical endurance criteria under the notification which included requirements to complete a 1,600-metre run within six minutes and 30 seconds, as well as long-jump or high-jump and shot-put events.
According to the petition, they were disqualified because no separate standards existed for transgender candidates and no accommodations were made to their physical standards to allow them to qualify during the physical endurance test. Despite qualifying in the written examination.
They have further pointed out that prior to the commencement of the recruitment process, they sent representations to the authorities raising the need for physical criteria specific to transgender candidates. However, these were not replied to.
In the other petition, the petitioners have challenged a direction dated October 10, 2025, which excluded transgender persons from recruitment to certain forces.
The government’s direction excluded transgender persons from recruitment to Karnataka State Reserve Police (KSRP), Indian Reserve Battalion (IRB), Armed Reserve (KARP) and Karnataka State Industrial Security Force (KSISF).
It challenged subsequent notifications dated June 19, 2026 and July 20, 2026 which recruited individuals to the above forces but did not provide for recruitment of transgender candidates under any of the recruitment categories.
According to the petition, the government’s October 2022 direction bars trans persons from accessing entire cadres of these forces despite there already being a provision for reservation of appointments for transgender persons in Rule 9(1D) of Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977.
The petitioners have also reiterated their argument that State has not provided any relaxation in standards and metrics in order to make it possible for transgender candidates to compete in the physical endurance tests.
Allowing for reservation of appointments and at the same time placing transgender candidates at a disadvantage by not introducing relaxations was contrary to law, they have said.
Advocates Avani Chokshi, Shilpa Prasad, Lalraut Feli, Shasoja Patel, Sampreetha S, Syeda Saba, Sahla Nachilli, Usha RV, Mrudula and Harikrishnan R, all of Samata Law, are appearing for the petitioners.
