Today, the Supreme Court declined to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) that asked the court to order all states to establish policies governing menstrual discomfort leave for working women and female students at their individual places of employment.
A bench consisting of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha, JB Pardiwala, and PS Narasimha heard the plea brought by Attorney Shailendra Mani Tripathi.
The bench led by the chief justice of India noted that the matter falls under the purview of government policy and suggested that a suggestion be made to the Union Ministry of Women and Child Development for consideration.
“Having regard to the policy dimension in the case, the petitioner may approach the Women and Child Ministry to file a representation,” DY Chandrachud said.
An intervenor stated, during the hearing, that giving women the option of menstruation leave might make employers less likely to hire women.
To this submission, CJI added, that it was true that forcing companies to provide menstrual leave might discourage them from employing any women at all.
The petition argued that women don’t have equal rights in India.
“It is accordingly a violation of article 14 in as much as this act differentiates women in the name of federalism and state policies. Despite that women suffer from similar physiological and health issues during their menstrual cycles, they are being treated differently in different states of India. However, women, having one citizenship, i.e., of India, must be treated equally and shall be conferred with equal rights,” it said.
The petition also noted that Dr Shashi Tharoor had introduced a bill in 2018 called the Women’s Sexual, Reproductive, and Menstrual Rights Bill that called for public institutions to provide free sanitary pads to female citizens on their property.
Menstruation Benefits Bill, 2017, another related bill, was introduced in 2022 on the first day of the budget session, but the Legislative Assembly dismissed it since it was a ‘unclean’ subject.
According to the petition, this illustrates a lack of legislative motivation to advance the idea of menstrual pain leave.
Earlier this month, the plea, which was mentioned for urgent listing by petitioner’s advocate Vishal Tiwari, contended that a number of nations, including the United Kingdom, China, Wales, Japan, Taiwan, Indonesia, South Korea, Spain, and Zambia, already provide menstrual discomfort leave in some capacity.
“The United Kingdom, Wales, China, Japan, Taiwan, Indonesia, South Korea, Spain, and Zambia are already providing menstrual pain leave in one form or another. Delhi High Court directed the centre and Delhi Government to consider PIL seeking menstrual leave as representation. Union Minister Smt. Smriti Irani in a written reply in Lok Sabha said that the Central Civil Service (Leave) Rules 1972 do not have any provisions for menstrual leave and presently there,” the petition submitted.
It was stated that only women had the exceptional potential to procreate and that during each stage of motherhood, whether menstruation, pregnancy, miscarriage, or any other medical issues, they endure a lot of physical and mental suffering.
A directive for the Center and all states to comply with Section 14 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, was requested in the petition.
The argument was that the 1961 Act, which has several provisions that have mandated that employers give female employees paid leave for a set period of time during pregnancy, in the event of a miscarriage, for a tubectomy operation, as well as in the event of medical complications related to these stages of maternity, addresses nearly all the issues that women face.
