New Delhi (TIP): Mandatory menstrual leave for women could ‘adversely impact (their) employment’ because employers ‘will not hire women if we make such a law’, Chief Justice Surya Kant said on Friday, March 13. Such a law would also ‘create a psychological fear or impression among working women… that they are ‘less’ than men’, the Chief Justice argued this morning as the court heard a petition by a lawyer, Shailendra Mani Tripathi, seeking direction to states to frame paid menstrual leave rules.
“Creating awareness and sensitisation is different… but the moment you bring in a law mandating menstrual leave, nobody will hire them (women),” he said, warning the petitioner, “You don’t know the mindset of employers. They will not hire women if we make such a law.”
“Affirmative action in respect of females is constitutionally recognised. But look at the practical reality in the job market. The more unattractive the human resource, the less is the possibility of assumption in the market. Look at from the business model. Will any employer be happy with the competing claims of other genders?” Justice Joymalya Bagchi said.
Specifically, the petitioner wanted the Supreme Court to ensure that women, whether students or working professionals, are allowed leave during menstruation. But such pleas, the Chief Justice declared, are “made to create fear…”
“They will call women inferior (and say) menstruation is something ‘bad’ happening to them.”
Senior Advocate MR Shamshad pointed out that in 2013 the Kerala government had granted menstrual leave for women students in all state-run universities. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan had then said the decision was part of a “commitment to realising a gender-just society”.
Shamshad also pointed out private companies made similar relaxations.
The Chief Justice, though, pointed out that these are voluntary measures. “The moment you say ‘compulsory in law’, nobody will give them jobs,” he stressed, “Nobody will take them in judiciary or government jobs… their career is over. They will say ‘you should sit at home…'”
In January the Supreme Court made a critical ruling on menstrual hygiene, recognising it as an ‘integral part of a girl child’s right to life, dignity, health, and education’.
A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan said governments bear a positive obligation, under Article 21 of the Constitution, to protect girls’ and women’s right to health
The court also issued mandatory directions to all governments to ensure free sanitary napkins, functional gender-segregated toilets, and menstrual health awareness campaigns.
SC issues notice to Mahua Moitra in cash-for-query case
The Supreme Court on Friday, March 13, stayed a part of the Delhi High Court’s order quashing the sanction granted by the Lokpal to the CBI to file a chargesheet against TMC MP Mahua Moitra in the cash-for-query case. A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notices to Moitra, the CBI and BJP MP and complainant Nishikant Dubey on the Lokpal’s petition challenging the December 19, 2025 high court order that set aside the Lokpal’s decision to grant sanction to the probe agency to file a chargesheet against the TMC MP in the case.
The high court had held that separate sanctions for the filing of a charge sheet and initiating prosecution are not contemplated by the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.
“The learned Lokpal is requested to accord its consideration for grant of sanction under Section 20 of the Lokpal Act, strictly in accordance with provisions thereof as construed hereinabove, within a period of one month from today,” the high court had said in para 89 of that judgement.
Be the first to comment