The Supreme Court of India on Friday expressed reservations about making menstrual leave mandatory, warning that such a law could unintentionally harm women’s employment prospects.
Chief Justice Surya Kant said compulsory menstrual leave might “adversely impact employment” because some employers could hesitate to hire women if such a provision were mandated by law. The court was hearing a petition filed by lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi seeking directions to states to frame rules allowing women—both students and working professionals—to take leave during menstruation.
“Creating awareness and sensitisation is different,” the Chief Justice observed, “but the moment you bring in a law mandating menstrual leave, nobody will hire them.” He cautioned the petitioner that employer attitudes could lead to unintended consequences. “You don’t know the mindset of employers. They may simply stop hiring women if such a law is introduced.”
The Chief Justice also argued that a mandatory provision might create a psychological perception that women are “less than men,” reinforcing stereotypes rather than promoting equality. According to the court, some petitions of this nature risk creating fear that menstruation is something “bad” or a reason to treat women as inferior.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate M R Shamshad pointed out that certain governments and private organisations have already taken voluntary steps in this direction. He noted that in 2013 the government of Kerala introduced menstrual leave for women students in state-run universities under Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, describing it as part of a commitment to building a gender-just society. Shamshad also highlighted that some private companies have introduced similar policies.
However, the Chief Justice emphasised the distinction between voluntary policies and a statutory mandate. “The moment you say it is compulsory in law, nobody will give them jobs,” he said, warning that such a move could affect opportunities even in the judiciary or government services.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court delivered a significant ruling on menstrual hygiene, recognising it as an integral part of a girl child’s rights to life, dignity, health, and education. A bench comprising J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan held that governments have a positive obligation under Article 21 of the Constitution to protect women’s health and dignity.
The court also directed governments to ensure access to free sanitary napkins, functional gender-segregated toilets, and widespread menstrual health awareness campaigns.
Also Read: NCERT Textbook Row: How Text On Judicial Corruption Invoked Supreme Court’s Wrath https://www.vibesofindia.com/ncert-textbook-row-how-text-on-judicial-corruption-invoked-supreme-courts-wrath/
