The question of whether transgender youth can enroll in the National Cadet Corps (NCC) raises fundamental issues of equality, statutory interpretation, policy formulation, and the Indian State’s obligations towards gender-diverse persons. The debate has gained national attention following the Kerala High Court’s landmark judgment in Janvin Cleetus v. Union of India & Ors. (2025), where a transgender applicant was denied NCC enrollment solely based on gender identity.
The Court, while empathetic to the petitioner’s plight, upheld the statutory bar against transgender enrollment, noting that the present legal framework restricts enrollment to “students of the male sex” and “students of the female sex” under Section 6 of the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948.
NCC: Purpose, Structure, and Gender-Based Divisions
Established under the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948, the NCC is one of India’s premier uniformed youth organisations. Its objectives include:
- Building character, discipline, camaraderie, and leadership among youth.
- Creating a pool of motivated youth trained in basic military skills.
- Promoting national integration and preparing young Indians for future roles, including potential career paths in the Armed Forces.
NCC training includes:
- Physical drills and close-contact exercises
- Camps with tented or shared accommodation
- Mixed outdoor activities
- Team exercises and adventure programs
Because the training environment requires intimate and physically demanding group activities, the NCC historically created gender-specific divisions—Senior and Junior Divisions for boys, and a Girls Division for female cadets. These divisions are integrated into the very design of training, infrastructure, and administrative guidelines.
Statutory Scheme Governing Enrollment: Section 6 of the 1948 Act
The crux of the legal debate lies in the wording of Section 6 of the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948, which expressly states:
- Section 6(1): Any student of the male sex may offer himself for enrollment.
- Section 6(2): Any student of the female sex may offer herself for enrollment.
There is no reference to transgender persons, gender-diverse youth, or a third gender category. Kerala High Court, evaluating this statutory scheme in Janvin Cleetus, highlighted that the Act’s language is “gender-binary” and excludes transgender identity by omission.
Thus, under the present legal framework:
- Enrollment is legally permitted only for males and females.
- Administrative guidelines mirror this statutory division.
- NCC units, camps, and accommodation facilities are structured exclusively for boys and girls.
This creates an explicit statutory barrier for transgender applicants, even if they meet all other eligibility criteria.
Case of Janvin Cleetus: What Happened?
Facts of the Case
In 2024, Janvin Cleetus, a 22-year-old transgender student from Kerala, applied for enrollment in the 30(K) Battalion NCC. They participated in the selection process and met all eligibility conditions. However, during the interview, Janvin was informed that transgender applicants cannot be enrolled under the existing NCC rules.
Janvin challenged the rejection, arguing that:
- It violated Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
- The NCC’s statutory framework must be interpreted in light of the Supreme Court’s recognition of transgender persons as a third gender (NALSA v. Union of India, 2014).
The Court’s Findings
- Kerala High Court empathised with the petitioner and acknowledged that transgender youth “should ideally get equal opportunity to get NCC training”. However, the Court held that:
- Section 6 of the NCC Act, 1948 is clear—only “male” and “female” students can be enrolled.
- Training camp conditions (shared accommodation, physical drills, field environments) require gender-specific arrangements.
- Without statutory or policy reform, courts cannot compel the NCC to create a new “transgender division”.
- Creating such a division requires:
A minimum number of transgender cadets,
Administrative restructuring,
Policy analysis,
Legislative amendments.
Outcome
The writ petition was dismissed, but the Court directed that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Law and Justice for appropriate consideration.
Importantly, the judgment does not state that transgender persons are inherently unfit for NCC training; rather, it emphasises that the legal framework must first be revised.
Constitutional Lens: Equality and Non-Discrimination
While the Court upheld the statutory scheme, it acknowledged the potential discomfort in transgender exclusion. From a constitutional standpoint:
Article 14: Equality Before Law
Transgender persons are entitled to equal protection. Excluding them from NCC may appear discriminatory.
However, the Court accepted the NCC’s argument that:
- The classification between male and female divisions is based on intelligible differentia,
- And has a rational nexus with safety, accommodation, and training design.
Thus, the inequality was considered legally permissible, though not ideal.
Article 15: Prohibition of Discrimination
Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex. The Supreme Court has interpreted “sex” to include gender identity.
Yet, since the NCC Act explicitly segregates cadets based on biological sex for operational reasons, the Court found no violation under present conditions.
Article 21: Right to Dignity
Exclusion from civic institutions may affect dignity, but the Court observed that the lack of legislative provision cannot be cured judicially.
What Could Change This Position? Pathways to Inclusive NCC Enrollment
The Court’s judgment provides an important roadmap:
Legislative Amendment
Parliament must amend Section 6 to include:
- “Students of the transgender gender”
- Or gender-neutral phrasing such as “students of any gender identity”
Infrastructure Reform
NCC camps will require:
- Separate transgender accommodation,
- Gender-neutral washrooms,
- Privacy-respecting arrangements.
Training of Officers
Awareness training for officers on:
- Gender sensitivity
- Transgender rights
- Anti-discrimination norms
Medical, Uniform, and Fitness Policy Revision
Current guidelines must adapt to:
- Hormone therapy implications,
- Gender-neutral vaccination/fitness records,
- Body measurement/ uniform standards.
Conclusion
Under the present statutory scheme, NCC enrollment is not possible for transgender youth, as reaffirmed by the Kerala High Court in Janvin Cleetus v. Union of India (2025). The exclusion stems not from deliberate discrimination but from outdated provisions of the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948 that recognise only male and female genders. The Court held that this legal framework cannot be judicially rewritten, and any inclusion of transgender cadets requires legislative intervention, policy amendments, and infrastructural reform.
However, the judgment also highlights that such exclusion is not ideal and must be addressed urgently. With the growing recognition of transgender rights and India’s commitment to equality, the time has come to modernise the NCC Act and create a truly inclusive youth training system. Ensuring transgender participation in the NCC would not only foster national integration but also reaffirm India’s constitutional promise of dignity and equality for all.
Important Link
Law Library: Notes and Study Material for LLB, LLM, Judiciary, and Entrance Exams