BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday directed the state government to implement the existing menstrual leave policy “strictly and faithfully”, pending formal enactment of the proposed legislation -- the Karnataka Menstrual Leave and Hygiene Bill, 2025.
“Upon such enactment, the state shall, without undue delay, frame appropriate rules so as to give full and meaningful effect to the statutory mandate. In the interregnum, it shall be incumbent upon the state to ensure effective operationalisation of the policy through the issuance of suitable guidelines, circulars and administrative instructions, as may be necessary to secure its uniform, consistent and rigorous implementation across all sectors,” the court ordered.
Justice M Nagaprasanna pronounced the verdict, which was reserved at the Dharwad Bench of the High Court, after hearing the petition filed by a 41-year-old woman hotel worker, Chandravva Hanamant Gokavi from Belagavi district, seeking directions for the implementation of the 2025 policy that mandates registered establishments to grant one-day leave per month to women employees, aged between 18 and 52 years, during their menstrual cycle.
The verdict came amid a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the menstrual leave policy, which were pending for adjudication before another single judge of the high court.
Discussing in detail the problems faced by menstruating women at the workplace and the menstrual policy adopted by other states and countries across the globe, Justice Nagaprasanna stated that broadly understood, the unorganised sectors may be classified into two categories.
First, enterprises owned by individuals or self-employed persons, engaging fewer than 10 workers and second, daily wage labourers, who remain outside the purview of the said government orders. These distinctions are indicative of the necessity for the state to adopt a more inclusive and responsive approach.
Therefore, it becomes incumbent upon the state to undertake comprehensive measures aimed at sensitising all sectors, both organised and unorganised, the judge noted.
The judge also said while organised sectors may be regulated through government orders and legislative intervention, the unorganised sector requires a more facilitative mechanism. However, beyond regulatory frameworks, what remains imperative is a sustained and pervasive effort to sensitise all segments of society, reaching every corner of the state to foster awareness, empathy and compliance, he said.
Disposing of the petition, the court observed that the state ought not to be deterred or constrained by misplaced apprehensions founded upon a superficial invocation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. “Men and women stand equal in the eyes of the law; yet, they are biologically distinct. To acknowledge such differences, particularly in matters concerning health, dignity and bodily autonomy, is not to transgress the guarantee of equality, but to give it substantive meaning,” he said.
Advocate Deeksha N Amrutesh, appearing for the petitioner, justified the policy of the state. Additional Advocate General, Prathima Honnapura, appearing for the state, placed a detailed statement lending full support to the policy enunciated by the government.