India’s apex court has declined to entertain a petition seeking a nationwide policy granting menstrual leave to working women and female students, with the bench observing that such a mandate could inadvertently discourage employers from hiring women. The court’s remarks have reignited a long-running debate across the country over whether menstrual leave is a progressive workplace reform or a measure that could reinforce gender stereotypes.
A two-judge bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant made the observations while hearing a petition filed by lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi seeking the formulation of a national policy granting menstrual leave. The bench noted that if the judiciary were to mandate such leave, it could have unintended consequences for women’s participation in the workforce.
During the hearing, the judges said a compulsory menstrual leave policy might create the perception that women are not on equal footing with their male colleagues. According to the bench, such a measure could ultimately be detrimental to women’s professional growth and opportunities. The court further remarked that a mandatory provision might lead private employers to view women employees as less desirable hires, potentially discouraging recruitment.
The petitioner had urged the court to direct the government to introduce a nationwide policy that would allow working women two to three days of leave during menstruation. Tripathi later stated that his intention behind filing the plea was to recognise the physical discomfort many women experience during their menstrual cycle and to provide them with appropriate workplace support.
However, the court maintained that policy decisions of this nature should be taken by the government after consulting various stakeholders. The bench indicated that authorities could consider the matter through broader deliberations rather than through judicial direction.
The court’s remarks have once again placed the issue of menstrual leave in the spotlight, reviving a national conversation that has long divided opinion. While some observers support the court’s view that special leave could reinforce stereotypes about women’s physical limitations, others argue that acknowledging menstrual health challenges is an important step toward ensuring workplace dignity and equality.
Public health expert and lawyer Sukriti Chauhan criticised the court’s observations, stating that the argument about reduced employability risks reinforcing the stigma surrounding menstruation. According to her, India already has legal frameworks aimed at ensuring workplace dignity, gender equality and safe working conditions for women. She argued that denying menstrual leave may force women to work under uncomfortable or even unsafe conditions during their menstrual cycle.
Chauhan also emphasised that recognising menstrual health needs could improve overall workplace productivity and employee well-being. Providing limited leave during difficult days, she said, would allow women to work more efficiently rather than pushing them to continue working while dealing with significant discomfort.
The debate has also raised questions about fairness and workplace equality. Critics of menstrual leave policies argue that offering additional leave exclusively to women could be seen as discriminatory toward men. Others note that in a society where menstruation is still considered a taboo topic, many women may hesitate to request such leave even if it is available.
Despite the ongoing debate, several countries have already introduced menstrual leave policies. Nations such as Spain, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia allow women to take time off during their menstrual cycle under specific conditions.
Within India, some states and institutions have also implemented limited provisions. Government employees in Bihar and Odisha are entitled to two days of menstrual leave per month, while Kerala provides similar benefits to certain categories of university and industrial training institute staff. More recently, Karnataka introduced legislation allowing menstruating women one day of leave each month.
In the private sector, several companies have also adopted menstrual leave policies in recent years. Conglomerate RPG Group announced a two-days-per-month period leave policy for employees in its tyre manufacturing subsidiary CEAT in 2025. Engineering giant Larsen & Toubro introduced a one-day monthly leave provision, while food delivery platform Zomato allows female employees up to 10 days of menstrual leave annually.
The Supreme Court’s stance is expected to keep the debate alive, as policymakers, employers and activists continue to grapple with the challenge of balancing workplace equality with recognition of women’s health needs.
