.avif)
The Supreme Court on March 13th, 2026 dismissed a Public Interest Litigation which sought to implement paid menstrual leave across establishments. The Supreme Court, while dismissing the case, observed that it has no doubt that the concerned authorities will implement a policy in consultation with all stakeholders vis-à-vis menstrual leave (Shailendra M. Tripathi v. Secretary, Ministry of Women and Child Development & Others|Diary No. 73736-2025). While the object of the PIL was noble, the Supreme Court’s reluctance to interfere in the matter is a reflection of the current realities faced in implementing such policies.
Menstruation, its effects, and associated rights have been a long-debated topic in various social circles and professional set-ups. Ideally, such matters would be regarded simply as a natural aspect of a woman’s life, not requiring further discussion or controversy. However, this is far from the present reality. The core issue of whether women should be granted specific concessions during their menstrual cycle is frequently met with resistance, especially in professional environments. Requests for such concessions, which are fundamentally rooted in health concerns, are frequently overshadowed by irrelevant arguments such as allegations of “special treatment”, fears regarding potential “misuse” of benefits, concerns that male colleagues may have to shoulder additional responsibilities if concessions are granted, so on and so forth. The negative, and oft times almost confrontational, reaction to the mere suggestion of implementing a policy for menstrual leave, makes one feel like they are navigating a live minefield. If a simple discussion invites opposition, then mandating such a policy is likely to invite further backlash.
When the State of Karnataka, in a progressive move, introduced a policy mandating 12 days of paid menstrual leave per annum to all women between the age group of 18-52 across all sectors, both private and public, the policy was quick to be challenged before the High Court of Karnataka by the Bangalore Hotels Association. One of the main arguments advanced was that the policy was not backed by law and that the policy was an unnecessary interference in a matter that could be handled through internal HR policies. This resistance, albeit by one section of the industry, reflects the prevailing mindset when it comes to beneficial legislations for women. The petition is still pending consideration before the High Court of Karnataka.
The Supreme Court in Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Govt. of India (2026 INSC 97) held that menstrual health and hygiene is a fundamental right under Art. 21 of the Constitution of India. This recognition has been accorded only in 2026 even though menstrual issues have existed since the beginning of time. Although the Supreme Court has acknowledged menstrual health as a fundamental right, the expectation that menstrual leave will become an accepted and welcome workplace policy appears to be a distant dream in India.
It is crucial for working Indians to recognise that the implementation of a menstrual leave policy should not be viewed as a regressive measure or an impediment to progress. In fact, several countries across the world have successfully adopted such policies. Japan, in 1947, was among the earliest nations to introduce menstrual leave. This means that for nearly eight decades, Japanese women have benefited from formal recognition of their needs in the workplace. In addition to Japan, countries such as Indonesia, South Korea, Zambia, and most recently Spain, have also enacted menstrual leave policies. The introduction of such policies demonstrates that providing menstrual leave does not hamper the functioning of professional environments. On the contrary, these policies have been integrated into their respective work cultures, showing that such measures can coexist with productive workforces.
Undoubtedly, menstrual leave is much needed in today’s world to advance the position of women within the workforce. However, current societal attitudes and prevailing mindsets pose significant challenges to the implementation and acceptance of such policies in our country. Since the Supreme Court has refrained from acting, the Government's intervention is all the more crucial to ensure that the rights and well-being of women employees are protected and promoted consistently across all sectors. However, it is also important to recognise that while mandated policies are introduced with the intention of promoting fair treatment and equal opportunities, there may be unintended repercussions such as silent withdrawal from hiring female candidates given the prevailing mindset of people. Therefore, along with policies, it is imperative that the underlying social attitudes be addressed through open discussion and education on menstruation and workplace inclusivity. Only by tackling these social aspects through education can lasting and positive change be realised for women in professional settings.
