The Supreme Court has questioned the rationale for notifying teaching vacancies separately for male and female candidates and has sought a response from the Delhi government on the exclusion of transgender persons from recruitment notifications, according to LiveLaw and IANS reports on October 20, 2026.

A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran issued notice on petitions filed by Jane Kaushik and Praveen Singh concerning vacancy notifications issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB). The Court asked what constitutional or statutory basis exists for notifying vacancies on the basis of gender, which recruitment rules govern DSSSB teaching notifications, and whether those rules require a male-female bifurcation at all.

The Bench also asked, in both petitions, how the respondents propose to include the third gender in DSSSB vacancy notifications — in other words, in what manner transgender persons would be accommodated in public employment. On Praveen Singh's petition, it asked why the High Court did not consider age relaxation for transgender persons under Rule 12, given the socio-economic discrimination they face.

Kaushik, a transgender woman, had challenged Delhi Directorate of Education and DSSSB notifications that allowed only binary candidates to apply. The High Court had disposed of her writ petition directing her to approach an advisory committee headed by former Justice Asha Menon; the Supreme Court noted the committee has no adjudicatory powers and allowed her to register on the DSSSB OARS portal as a transgender person, but the recruitment notifications themselves remained gender-binary, LiveLaw reported.

The Court has directed that answers to its questions be filed through an affidavit within 15 days and shared with the petitioners so they can file a rejoinder. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the respondents.

Sources: LiveLaw (October 20, 2026); IANS via Hi India (October 20, 2026).