Madras High Court Directs Director Of Medical Education To Conduct Awareness Programmes For Updating LGBTQIA+ Issues
|The Court was dealing with a Writ Petition concerning the need for either bringing a separate policy for transgender and intersex community or to have a unified policy.
The Madras High Court has directed the Director of Medical Education, Tamil Nadu Government to conduct awareness programmes for updating the LGBTQIA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, etc.) issues and also asked to include the speakers of such community.
The Court was dealing with a Writ Petition concerning to enable wider deliberations on the need for either bringing a separate policy for transgender and intersex community or to have a unified policy by including all the communities under one umbrella.
A Single Bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh ordered, “… there shall be a direction to the Director of Medical Education, Government of Tamil Nadu to conduct awareness programmes for updating the LGBTQIA+ issues based on the competency available in on the medical education curriculum issued by NMC, in all the Government and Private Medical Colleges in Tamil Nadu and while doing so, they must also include the speakers belonging to the LGBTQIA+ community. This direction shall be followed in letter and spirit.”
Advocate Vadhana Bhaskar appeared for the Petitioners while Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) R. Muniyapparaj, Senior Panel Counsel (SPC) V. Chandrasekaran, Senior Advocates Sriram Panchu, G. Sankaran, and Advocate B.S. Ajeetha appeared for the Respondents.
Submissions
It was submitted via the Writ Petition that bringing a separate policy for transgender and intersex persons will result in discord and difference among the communities which will not be in the interest of the LGBTQIA+ community at large. It was further submitted that the entire community together have fought their way and as a result, there is some light at the end of the tunnel and if this unity is disrupted, it will only weaken the community.
It was also submitted that there is very little understanding about the problems faced by the transmen and there is very little representation for transmen and also for intersex community in the committee and therefore bringing out a separate policy for transgender must not in turn, marginalise transmen and intersex people. On the other hand, it was submitted that there will be no split or division owing to bringing two separate policies and by bringing two separate policies, there will be more clarity and the fight for recognition will continue with all persons belonging to LGBTQIA+ community together.
Court's Observations
The High Court in the above regard, clarified, “… it is for the legislature to finalise the policy and give it the force of law and this Court cannot trench upon that area which is within the exclusive domain of the legislature. Hence, this Court has the fervent hope that all the views that were put forth during the deliberations that took place during the hearing, will be taken into account by the State before finalising the policy and giving it the force of law.”
The Court said that it is unusual for the Government to allow its policy to be discussed before it is given the force of law and the fact that the Government was also open for such a discussion, shows that the State wants to take into account the views expressed by all the stake holders before they come out with the historic policy for LGBTQIA+ community and give it a force of law.
“Such law will be one of a kind in the entire country and it will pave way for a better future for those persons who were exploited and marginalised by this society for a long period of time”, it further remarked.
The Court, therefore, gave time of three months sought by the State to come up with the finalised policy.
The Court observed that it will be more appropriate if the conversion therapy is brought within the curriculum and it is informed to the medical students that such conversion therapy is completely barred and such practise will have serious consequences.
“By incorporating the same in the curriculum, there will be more awareness among the students and over a period of time, the 2023 regulations will also come into effect”, it added.
The Court also directed the Ministry of Education to follow up on the finalised module submitted by the NCERT and come up with their final approval within eight weeks.
The Court further took note of the issue relating to a medical education session which was organised at Madurai Medical College in September 2024 to discuss on the LGBTQIA+ issues. The said programme was attended by 120 final year students and there were a total 5 speakers who were supposed to address the audience. When one of the speakers was addressing the audience, a cardiologist stood up and stated that they are boycotting the programme and he ordered all the students to leave the hall. It was submitted that such an act was done with an intention to insult the speakers and particularly three of the speakers who belonged to the community out of which two of them belonged to non-medical profession.
“The learned counsel submitted that while conducting such seminars, the lived experience of those belonging to the community will help in bridging the gap in the health care centres for the LGBTQIA+ individuals and will promote a more inclusive and sophisticated health care system. However, the attitude of the dean was such that stringent restrictions were made by issuing a circular after the meeting was already disrupted. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that necessary directions must be issued by this Court to ensure that no such disruptions takes place in future”, it added.
The Court said that such an incident once again shows the mindset among some of the persons who form part of medical education and hence, it is important to include LGBTQIA+ persons as speakers to address their issues in order to help the medical and health care professionals to understand their difficulties better.
“Sharing the lived experience is the most powerful way in which such awareness can be created”, it added.
Accordingly, the High Court issued necessary directions and listed the case on June 9, 2025.
Cause Title- S. Sushma & Anr. v. Director General of Police & Ors. (Case Number: Writ Petition No.7284 of 2021)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates Vadhana Bhaskar and S. Manuraj.
Respondents: APP R. Muniyapparaj, SPC V. Chandrasekaran, Senior Advocates Sriram Panchu, G. Sankaran, Advocates B.S. Ajeetha, R. Ramaswamy, K. Chandrasekar, Subharanjani, B. Rabu Manohar, Jayna Kothari, and Rajagopalan.