A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan pronounced the judgment on a plea seeking free sanitary pads and adequate sanitation facilities for schoolgirls. The court directed all states, Union Territories, and schools to provide biodegradable sanitary napkins free of cost to girl students in all educational institutions.
“Before parting with the issue, we want to say that this pronouncement is not just for stakeholders of the legal system. It is also meant for classrooms where girls hesitate to ask for help. It is for teachers who want to help but are not able to due to the lack of resources. Progress is measured by how we protect the vulnerable,” Justice Pardiwala observed.
The apex court also ordered the provision of separate toilets for female and male students, along with disability-friendly toilets, in every school. The compliance will be mandatory for both government and private institutions, with private schools facing the possibility of derecognition if they fail to adhere to these directives.
The bench emphasized that access to menstrual hygiene is not a matter of charity or policy discretion but a constitutional entitlement, stemming from the right to live with dignity and bodily autonomy. Authorities will be held accountable for ensuring that girls have access to toilets and free sanitary pads, the court added.
Highlighting the impact of inadequate facilities and social stigma, the court observed that the lack of basic hygiene infrastructure directly affects girls’ health, education, and privacy.
The judgment follows proceedings that began in November last year, triggered by a disturbing incident at Maharshi Dayanand University in Haryana. Three women sanitation workers were allegedly forced to send photographs of their sanitary pads to prove they were menstruating—a practice that sparked nationwide outrage over “period-shaming.”
Earlier, a bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan had expressed concern over such invasive practices in educational institutions and workplaces, describing them as reflective of a “deeply troubling mindset.”
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), which filed the petition, had highlighted multiple instances of women and girls subjected to degrading checks, arguing that such actions violated their right to life, dignity, privacy, and bodily integrity under Article 21. The SCBA further emphasized that women workers, especially in the unorganized sector, are entitled to respectful working conditions that accommodate biological differences.
During the hearings, the court noted that if a woman is unable to perform heavy work due to menstruation-related pain, alternative arrangements should be made instead of subjecting her to humiliating scrutiny.
The Haryana government informed the court that an inquiry had been initiated into the university incident and that action had been taken against the two persons responsible.
