New Delhi

The Supreme Court of India on Friday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a nationwide policy mandating menstrual leave for women students and workers, observing that such a requirement could unintentionally reinforce gender stereotypes.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that while the issue was important, making menstrual leave compulsory through legislation could have unintended consequences in employment.

“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 bench said.

The court, however, noted that the competent authority could examine the representation made by the petitioner and consider framing a policy after consulting relevant stakeholders.

The PIL was filed by Shailendra Mani Tripathi. The bench disposed of the plea while directing authorities to take an appropriate decision on the representation already submitted by the petitioner.

During the hearing, the Chief Justice raised concerns about the possible social and professional consequences of mandating menstrual leave through law, saying such measures might inadvertently strengthen stereotypes about women.

Senior advocate M. R. Shamshad, appearing for the petitioner, argued that several states and institutions had already introduced provisions related to menstrual leave.

He cited the example of Kerala, where certain relaxations have been introduced in educational institutions, and added that some private companies have voluntarily adopted menstrual leave policies for employees.

Responding to the submission, the Chief Justice said voluntary initiatives were welcome but cautioned against making such provisions mandatory.

“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. They will say you should sit at home after informing everyone,” he said.

READ MORE: Women cops and social workers join hands to host Iftar for women

The bench also noted that the petitioner had already submitted a representation to the authorities and observed that it was unnecessary to repeatedly approach the court seeking a mandamus in the matter.