The petitioner then filed an application for change of name in the educational documents under Rule 5 (3). However, by means of the impugned order dated April 8, 2025, the regional secretary, Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, rejected the application on the aforesaid grounds.

Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, senior advocate HR Mishra and Chitrangada Narayan relied on various judgments of the apex court and high courts of other states to assert the right of the petitioner to get his name changed after the gender change.

In his judgment dated November 6, Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery said: “The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 is a special Act. Therefore, the concerned respondents (education authorities of the state) have committed a legal error by not applying the provisions of the Act of 2029 in favour of the petitioner.”

The court said that under Rule 5(3) and Annexure-1 of the Act, transgender persons could modify all official documents including educational certificates, which could be updated to reflect their correct name, gender, and photograph. The bench emphasised that government inaction infringed upon the constitutional rights of equality, dignity, and non-discrimination guaranteed to transgender individuals.

Consequently, the court set aside the April 8, 2025, order. It instructed the state government and the Board to complete the necessary amendments and issue updated certificates within eight weeks.