Police recruitment: Plea in Karnataka HC questions imposition of cismale fitness requirements on transgender candidates

Seven transgender persons have moved the Karnataka High Court challenging the alleged failure of the State to provide appropriate physical standards and endurance-test relaxations for transgender candidates in recruitment to Armed Police Constable posts.

The same petitioners have also filed a separate plea challenging the exclusion of transgender candidates from recruitment to certain police forces, including the Karnataka State Reserve Police.

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 police recruitment authorities.

The petitions raise related questions concerning the proper implementation of the one per cent horizontal reservation for transgender persons under the Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977, and the application of physical eligibility criteria in police recruitment.

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 the recruitment for Armed Police Constables.

The plea challenges Notification No. 445 dated September 12, 2022, concerning the recruitment of Armed Police Constables.

The petitioners had applied for the posts under the category of “Male Transgender” candidates, appeared for the written examination and qualified. However, they were subsequently disqualified during the physical standard and physical endurance tests.

They have challenged the recruitment notification for creating a separate “Male Transgender” category instead of allowing transgender persons to avail themselves of horizontal reservation for trans candidates by providing for an "Others" category.

In this regard, the petitioners have relied on Rule 9(1D) of the Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977, introduced through an amendment in 2021.

This provision provides for one per cent horizontal reservation for transgender persons across General Merit, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, with a separate “Others” category in recruitment applications.

The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal had earlier dismissed their applications filed in the matter through a common order dated June 2, 2026.

The Tribunal had held that the physical standards prescribed for the recruitment could not be relaxed merely because the candidates belonged to the transgender community.

The petitioners have challenged this ruling before the High Court, arguing that the authorities subjected them to the same physical benchmarks prescribed for cisgender male candidates without considering separate or appropriate standards for transmen.

The petitioners argue that simply allowing transgender candidates to apply does not amount to meaningful implementation of transgender reservation if they are then subjected to standards designed for cisgender men without examining whether separate or relaxed standards are required.

The petition refers to the minimum height and physical endurance requirements under the notification, including a 1,600-metre run to be completed within six minutes and 30 seconds, besides long-jump or high-jump and shot-put events.

According to the petitioners, the absence of separate standards and reasonable accommodation resulted in their disqualification despite their success in the written examination.

They have also pointed out that they had submitted representations to the authorities seeking appropriate physical criteria for transgender candidates, but the requests were not acted upon.

The other petition challenges a government direction excluding transgender persons from recruitment to certain police forces.

The petitioners have challenged a direction dated October 10, 2025, issued by the State government, which excluded transgender persons from recruitment to the Karnataka State Reserve Police (KSRP), the Indian Reserve Battalion (IRB), the Armed Reserve (KARP) and the Karnataka State Industrial Security Force (KSISF).

The petition also challenges subsequent recruitment notifications issued on June 19, 2026, and in July 2026, which allegedly failed to provide for the recruitment of transgender candidates under the relevant recruitment categories.

According to the petition, the government’s direction effectively denies transgender persons access to entire cadres despite the reservation framework provided in Rule 9(1D) of the Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977.

The petitioners have further contended that the State has not provided appropriate relaxations in physical standards and endurance tests to enable transgender candidates to participate meaningfully in the selection process.

They have argued that the government cannot introduce a reservation benefit while simultaneously imposing conditions that make access to the relevant posts practically unattainable.

The petitioners are being represented by advocates Avani Chokshi, Shilpa Prasad, Lalraut Feli, Shasoja Patel, Sampreetha S, Syeda Saba, Sahla Nachiylli, Usha RV, Mrudula and Harikrishnan R of Samata Law.