'Nobody will hire them': Mandatory menstrual leave can adversely impact women's employment, says Supreme Court

Directs authorities to examine the possibility of framing a policy on menstrual leave after consulting all relevant stakeholders.

The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a PIL petition seeking a nationwide policy providing menstrual leave for women students and workers, observing no one would give them jobs in such a scenario. The court also observed that such a provision would unintentionally reinforce gender stereotypes.

"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," a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said.

Senior advocate M R Shamshad, appearing for the petitioner, pointed out that certain States and institutions have already taken steps to accommodate menstrual leave.

Responding to this, the Chief Justice said voluntary policies were welcome but cautioned against making such provisions mandatory through law.

"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," the CJI said.

The petition was disposed of with the direction to the authorities to take a decision on the representation.

The court said competent authority may consider the representation and examine the possibility of framing a policy on menstrual leave after consulting all relevant stakeholders.