Karnataka High Court Directs KSLU To Reduce Cut-Off Marks For Transgender Candidates By At Least 2%, Provide Reservation In LLB Admissions

The Karnataka High Court on Monday (July 20) directed the Karnataka State Law University (KSLU) to incorporate reservation for transgender persons in its forthcoming admission notification for the three-year LL.B. course and to reduce the eligibility criteria for such applicants by at least 2& or to the lowest among the existing categories, whichever is more beneficial.

A Division Bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Venkatesh Naik T passed the direction while hearing an appeal filed by the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) against a single judge's order directing the university to provide 0.5% reservation to transgender persons in admissions.

Referring to the Supreme Court's judgment in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014), the Bench observed:

“...Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the fact that the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, reported in (2014) 5 SCC 438 contains a clear direction, at paragraph 135.3, for providing reservation in admissions to educational institutions, we are of the opinion that the KSLU, in its forthcoming notification, should incorporate the said reservation as part of the notification.”

The Court further directed KSLU to ensure that the eligibility criteria for transgender applicants are reduced by at least 2 per cent or aligned with the lowest cut-off among existing categories, whichever is more beneficial to the applicant.

The direction came after the Court had previously expressed strong displeasure over the State's failure to implement the Supreme Court's 2014 mandate in NALSA v. Union of India, observing that nearly 12 years have passed since the landmark judgment..

The Bench also suo motu impleaded the Bar Council of India, as well as BMS College of Law and Seshadripuram Law College—the two institutions preferred by the respondent-student for admission.

The order was passed after counsel appearing for KSLU submitted that the admission notification for the three-year LL.B. programme would be issued within seven to ten days and that the university had already informed the colleges identified by the respondent regarding reservation of seats.

However, the respondent, who appeared in person, informed the Court that BMS College of Law had issued a notice on July 17 requiring submission of documents such as the migration certificate, percentage conversion certificate, transfer certificate and transcript by July 20, failing which his application would not be considered.

In response, KSLU submitted that, since the admission notification had not yet been issued, the student's application could not be withdrawn by a constituent college and that the notice issued by the college would not be sustainable.

The Court also directed that the ten issues raised by the respondent in a memo dated July 7, 2026, be made available to KSLU so that immediate steps could be taken to secure admission for the student and address the grievances raised.

During the hearing, Additional Advocate General Reuben Jacob, appearing for the State, submitted that a baseline survey of transgender persons had been conducted by the Department of Women and Child Development and the Karnataka State Women's Development Corporation (KSWDC), and that the data collected would aid formulation of a reservation policy for educational institutions.

He further submitted that the State was considering whether the criteria applicable to reservation for transgender persons in public employment could be extended, with suitable modifications, to the field of education. The State also indicated that preference could be given to transgender persons domiciled in Karnataka while framing the policy.

Recording the State's submissions, the Bench directed that the issues raised by the respondent in the July 7 memo be considered while framing a common reservation policy applicable to universities and educational institutions across the State.

The Court noted that the Women's Development Corporation could submit a proposal, based on the survey data and its recommendations, to the State Government regarding reservation for transgender persons in education. It further recorded the State's assurance that suitable orders would be passed in light of the existing 1 per cent horizontal reservation provided to transgender persons in public employment.

In previous hearings, the Bench noted that Karnataka was among the first States to implement reservation for transgender persons in public employment, but had yet to extend similar benefits in the sphere of education.

The respondent-student had earlier filed a memo seeking several interim measures, including reservation of seats for transgender applicants, relaxation of age restrictions, hostel and sanitation facilities of choice, fee concessions, protection of dignity and privacy, and simplification of documentation requirements.

Pointing out that the State had not filed objections to the proposed measures, the student sought immediate implementation of the safeguards.

The High Court had also urged the State Government to expedite the formulation of a comprehensive policy on reservation for transgender persons in educational institutions, noting that the proposal had remained pending before various departments for nearly two years.

Since the academic year had already commenced and the student had lost valuable academic years despite a favourable interim order, the Court had explored the possibility of accommodating the student in a college affiliated with KSLU.

Earlier, KSLU had undertaken before the Court to endeavour to accommodate the student in any of its affiliated colleges, including BMS College of Law and Seshadripuram Law College, subject to merit and availability of seats. Pursuant to the student's preference, the Division Bench had directed the university to reserve one seat each in the two institutions.

Case Title: National Law School of India University v. Mugil Anbu Vasantha & Ors.Case No: WA 96/2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order