The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking a uniform national policy granting menstrual leave to women students and working professionals. The court observed that making such a benefit compulsory could unintentionally reinforce stereotypes and potentially deter employers from hiring women. A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the request may have adverse effects on women's employment opportunities.
Addressing the petitioner's plea, the bench remarked, "These pleas are made to create fear, to call women inferior, that menstruation is something bad happening to them. This is an affirmative right. But think about the employer who needs to give paid leave." The judges highlighted that although menstrual leave acknowledges a legitimate issue, mandating it through legislation could backfire socially and professionally.
Petitioner cites examples
The PIL was filed by Shailendra Mani Tripathi, whose counsel, senior advocate MR Shamshad, pointed out that some states and private organisations have already implemented menstrual leave. He noted that Kerala has allowed relaxations for students and several companies have offered such leave voluntarily. Responding to this, the CJI said voluntary measures were welcome but warned against legal compulsion. "Voluntarily given is excellent. The moment you say it is compulsory in law, nobody will give them jobs. Nobody will take them in the judiciary or government jobs; their career will be over," he said.
Authorities asked to examine representation
The bench clarified that it was not inclined to issue a mandamus since the petitioner had already submitted a representation to the competent authority. It directed the concerned officials to evaluate the proposal in consultation with all stakeholders and take an appropriate decision. The PIL was accordingly disposed of.
ALSO READ: SC allows passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, who is in coma for 13 years, in landmark verdict
