Kerala HC Rejects Transgender Student's Bid for NCC Enrollment, Cites Gender-Specific Training Needs but Calls for Policy Overhaul

Ernakulam – The Kerala High Court on Thursday dismissed a writ petition filed by a 22-year-old transgender student seeking enrollment in the National Cadet Corps (NCC), while directing authorities to review the exclusion of transgender individuals from the program.

The petitioner, Janvin Cleetus, a resident of Valiyathura in Thiruvananthapuram, argued that his rejection from the 30(K) Battalion NCC in Calicut solely on the basis of his transgender identity violated fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality before law), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution.

Cleetus, who holds a transgender identity card issued by the Thiruvananthapuram District Collector on February 14, 2024, had applied for enrollment on August 16, 2024, and cleared initial eligibility criteria, including age and academic qualifications. His secondary school leaving certificate and the NCC application form were submitted as evidence. He was even provisionally listed by the NCC officer at RSM SNDP Yogam College in Koyilandy. However, during the interview stage, officials revealed that transgender candidates were ineligible, citing the program's binary gender divisions for males and females.

Represented by advocate Dhuanja M.S., Cleetus contended in court that such discrimination based on gender identity was unconstitutional, emphasizing the NCC's role in fostering character, discipline, and leadership among youth.

The respondents – including the Union of India (Ministry of Defence), the NCC Directorate in Kerala and Lakshadweep, the 30(K) Battalion in Calicut, RSM SNDP Yogam College, its NCC unit, and the Kerala State Higher Education Department – defended the decision in a counter-affidavit. They argued that Section 6 of the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948, explicitly limits enrollment to "any student of male sex" for the Senior or Junior Divisions and "any student of the female sex" for the Girls Division, with no provision for transgender cadets.

"The divisions created in the NCC are only for male and female genders," the respondents stated, adding that the current policy justifies the exclusion to ensure the "overall well-being and safety" of cadets during training. The NCC curriculum, they explained, mirrors Armed Forces protocols and involves "close contact physical exercises/games, long and short camps where cadets [stay] in field conditions in tentage, confined accommodation, etc., where gender of the Cadet is an important aspect."

Delivering the judgment after hearing arguments from the petitioner's counsel, Senior Panel Counsel Dayasindhu Shreehari N.S. for the Centre, and Government Pleader Dheeraj A.S. for the state, Justice N. Nagaresh acknowledged the broader aims of the NCC, established under the 1948 Act to "develop character, comradeship, discipline, the spirit of adventure and ideals of selfless service among young citizens." The program also seeks to "create a pool of organised, trained and motivated youth with leadership qualities in all walks of life, who will serve the nation regardless of [the] career they choose," and to motivate youth toward the Armed Forces.

What did the Court say

However, the judge upheld the gender-specific framework, noting that the Act "does not contemplate an NCC Division for Transgenders." He observed that the training's nature – including shared accommodations and physical activities – necessitates "measures for the well being of the Cadets belonging to different genders."

In a key observation, Justice Nagaresh stated: "It is true that candidates belonging to Transgender section stand to lose in the matter of enrollment in NCC and ideally the Transgender students should also get opportunity to enroll in NCC." He further clarified that while the scheme does not violate Article 14's equality guarantee – as "there is intelligible differentia in the matter of providing differential treatment in NCC for persons belonging to different genders" – creating a separate transgender division would require "minimum / sufficient number of Transgender students to form separate Division," along with "sufficient studies" and potential "legislative intervention."

"Those are matters of policy which require sufficient studies, which is the function of the Executive," the judge added, emphasizing that implementation would require legislative intervention also.

Dismissing the petition, the court nonetheless took a progressive step by directing the High Court Registry to forward a copy of the judgment to the Secretaries of the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, "for consideration of the issue and action, as is found necessary."

The ruling comes amid growing advocacy for transgender inclusion in educational and quasi-military programs in India, following the Supreme Court's 2014 NALSA judgment recognizing transgender persons as a "third gender" entitled to equal rights.