New Delhi, June 16 -- The Supreme Court on Monday stayed further proceedings before four high courts hearing challenges to the constitutional validity of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, while issuing notice on the Union government's plea seeking transfer of all such cases to the apex court to avoid conflicting rulings on the legislation. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice V Mohana passed the order on transfer petitions filed by the Centre, which has argued that identical constitutional questions arising from the 2026 amendment are already pending before the Supreme Court and should be adjudicated by a single forum. "Further proceedings before high courts shall remain stayed," ordered the bench after issuing notice to petitioners who have challenged the law before the Rajasthan, Delhi, Karnataka and Kerala high courts. Indicating its inclination to centralise the litigation, the bench observed: "It is better that all matters are taken up either by one high court or we decide it." The matter has now been posted for hearing in July. The order marks a significant development in the growing constitutional challenge to the amendment legislation, which has triggered litigation across the country over fears that it dismantles the principle of self-identification of gender recognised by the Supreme Court in its landmark judgment in National Legal Services Authority Vs Union of India (2014). Appearing for the Union government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the constitutional validity of the same enactment was being examined simultaneously by multiple high courts even though the Supreme Court was already seized of an identical challenge. "This court is already seized of this issue. The petitions before the high courts challenge the constitutional validity of the 2026 Act," Mehta submitted. The Centre's transfer plea raised concerns it first flagged before the CJI-led bench on May 27, when it contended that parallel proceedings before different constitutional courts could result in divergent judicial pronouncements on the same law. At least four high courts are currently hearing challenges to the amendment. P4...