Prayagraj, February 19 The certificate issued by a district magistrate under Section 7 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, is conclusive proof of a person's gender identity for the purpose of obtaining a passport, the Allahabad High Court has ruled.
A division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Siddharth Nandan observed that the passport authority "cannot insist on a fresh medical examination" or "seek changes in the birth certificate" to effect a change of gender in a passport.
The court passed the order on February 10 while disposing of a petition filed by Khush R Goel, who had challenged a June 23, 2025 order of the passport authorities directing him to undergo a fresh medical examination at a clinic empanelled by them for change of gender in his passport.
According to the petition, the petitioner was born a female but later identified as a transgender person. After attaining majority, he underwent gender reassignment surgery and transitioned to male. He subsequently approached the district magistrate and obtained a certificate under the 2019 Act, which entitles the holder to change name and gender in all official documents.
However, when he sought correction of gender in his passport, the authorities directed him to undergo a fresh medical examination.
The bench noted that Clause 5 of the certificate issued by the district magistrate specifically entitles the holder to update name and gender in all official documents. It held that once such a certificate is issued, there is no requirement for the passport authorities to demand any further medical examination or additional documents.
Emphasising the object behind the enactment of the 2019 law, the court observed that Parliament brought in the statute to address the social ostracism faced by transgender persons and to ensure their dignity and equal rights, so that they are not compelled to suppress their identities contrary to their innate personality.
Holding that the district magistrate's certificate "gives a quietus to the controversy," the court disposed of the petition and set aside the requirement of further medical examination.