In a significant ruling reinforcing both the protection of transgender rights and the sanctity of students’ educational documents, the Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University to constitute a university-level

The Legal Affair

Madras High Court Directs Medical University to Form Transgender Committee and Orders Release of Withheld Certificates
Share this:

Madras High Court Directs Medical University to Form Transgender Committee and Orders Release of Withheld Certificates
Introduction:
In a significant ruling reinforcing both the protection of transgender rights and the sanctity of students’ educational documents, the Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University to constitute a university-level committee for transgender persons in accordance with Rule 10(8) of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020. The order was passed by Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan in the matter of Vignesh D @ Gargi v. The Health and Family Welfare Department and Others [2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 305], where the petitioner, a transgender medical student, sought relief against alleged arbitrary conduct by Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital. The grievances included withholding of original educational documents, an unreasonable fee demand, and failure to issue crucial certificates such as internship records and conduct certificates. The case thus touched on two vital aspects: the institutional responsibility to safeguard transgender students from discrimination and harassment, and the legal principle that educational institutions cannot withhold certificates to enforce financial claims.

Arguments:
The petitioner Vignesh D, also known as Gargi, represented by Counsel Mr. Rajagopalan R @ Kanmani R, argued that the conduct of the college amounted to harassment and created insurmountable barriers in the continuation of their medical career. The plea specifically demanded that the withheld educational documents—including school certificates, compulsory rotating internship records, attempt certificates, transfer certificates, and conduct certificates—be released without arbitrary fee demands. Furthermore, recognizing the broader systemic issue faced by transgender students across institutions, the petitioner sought a direction for the Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University to constitute a committee accessible for transgender persons as mandated by Rule 10(8) of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020. The petitioner contended that the non-existence of such a committee not only violated statutory obligations but also deprived transgender students of a crucial protective mechanism against discrimination, harassment, and bullying, particularly from peers and faculty members.

In support of their case, the petitioner emphasized that educational certificates are not mere documents but indispensable properties tied to a student’s future. Any delay or wrongful withholding could irreparably harm a career built through years of hard work. The petitioner underscored that Rule 10(8) of the 2020 Rules obligates all educational institutions to establish accessible committees for transgender persons with powers to intervene in cases of harassment, ensuring that students are not subjected to further distress by the presence of bullies or discriminatory actors within the institution. By failing to comply with this statutory requirement, the respondent university was denying transgender students their rightful protections.

On the other hand, the respondents, represented by a panel of counsels including Mr. K. Tippu Sulthan, Government Advocate; Mr. B. Rabu Manohar, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel; Mrs. V. Sudha, Central Government Standing Counsel; Mr. A. Mohamed Goush, Standing Counsel; Mrs. C. Latha Rani, Standing Counsel; Mr. U. Baranidharan, Standing Counsel; and Mr. Abishek Jeenasenan, sought to defend the position of the authorities. However, the key respondent Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital submitted that it was ready to return all original certificates to the petitioner and had decided to waive any alleged arrears in fees. This submission signaled a significant shift from the earlier rigid stance of withholding certificates to enforce financial claims. While the respondent college attempted to mitigate the issue by offering compliance, the fact remained that valuable time and academic continuity of the petitioner had already been disrupted.

Judgement:
Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, after considering the submissions, firmly held that the conduct of withholding educational documents amounted to an impermissible practice. The Court observed that certificates and documents are highly valuable properties of students and constitute the backbone of their future career. The Court categorically noted that institutions cannot claim lien over certificates under any pretext, including disputes over fee payment. Referring to the consequences of such wrongful retention, the Court emphasized that delay in providing certificates could lead to serious repercussions, depriving students of opportunities for employment, higher studies, or registration in professional councils.

In addressing the larger issue of transgender rights within educational spaces, the Court drew attention to Rule 10(8) of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020. Justice Ilanthiraiyan stressed that the mandate requiring universities and educational institutions to constitute transgender committees was not optional but a statutory obligation aimed at ensuring dignity, equality, and protection from harassment. The absence of such a committee at the university level amounted to systemic neglect of transgender students’ rights. Accordingly, the Court directed the Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University to constitute the said committee within a strict timeline of twelve weeks. Such a committee, as envisaged under the Rules, must be accessible to transgender students and equipped with powers to take remedial action, including ensuring that victims of harassment are not forced to share space with their tormentors, even if they are faculty members.

The Court further directed the petitioner to approach Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College within one week from the receipt of the order, and in return, the college was mandated to release all educational documents without imposing any fee arrears. This clear directive ensured both immediate relief to the petitioner and systemic reform for future cases.

The judgment is remarkable for two reasons. First, it categorically rejected the regressive practice of using educational certificates as leverage for fee collection, reaffirming the principle that students’ career rights cannot be compromised. Second, it highlighted the importance of institutional compliance with transgender rights legislation, giving teeth to Rule 10(8) of the 2020 Rules by compelling the University to act within a fixed timeframe. By protecting the rights of one student, the Court has paved the way for greater inclusivity and accountability across the higher education system.

The ruling also resonates with constitutional principles under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantee equality, prohibit discrimination, and protect the right to life and dignity. The Court’s emphasis on documents being “most valuable properties” ties directly to the recognition that education is not just a personal achievement but a protected constitutional right whose protection is essential for the realization of social justice. For transgender students, who often face compounded discrimination, the establishment of a dedicated grievance redressal mechanism is a crucial step towards creating inclusive and equitable educational environments.

In sum, the Madras High Court’s order not only resolved the petitioner’s immediate grievances but also ensured systemic compliance with transgender protection laws, thereby advancing both education rights and dignity rights. The ruling has set a precedent that educational institutions cannot exploit their power to the detriment of students’ careers and must proactively safeguard marginalized groups through statutory committees.