Menstrual Health Fundamental Right Under Article 21; Schools Must Provide Free Biodegradable Sanitary Napkins And Hygienic Toilets: Supreme Court
Kiran Raj
The Supreme Court Division Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan, in a public interest petition highlighting how lack of menstrual hygiene support in schools contributes to absenteeism and dropouts among adolescent girls, has held that dignified menstrual health forms part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court directed all States and Union Territories to ensure that every school, including privately managed institutions in urban and rural areas, provides free oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins that are readily accessible to girl students. It also ordered that schools have functional, hygienic, gender-segregated toilets with privacy safeguards and handwashing facilities and issued nationwide directions in line with the Union’s “Menstrual Hygiene Policy for School Going Girls”.
The petitioner, a social worker, approached the Supreme Court through a Public Interest Litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution. The petition sought directions to the Union of India, States, and Union Territories to ensure the provision of free sanitary pads to every female child studying between classes 6 and 12, and to provide separate toilets for females in all government-aided and residential schools. The petitioner also sought consequential reliefs regarding the maintenance of toilets and the implementation of awareness programmes.
In response, the Union of India filed an affidavit admitting that menstrual practices are often clouded by taboos and socio-cultural restrictions, acknowledging limited access to sanitary products and safe facilities. The Union placed on record the "Menstrual Hygiene Policy for School Going Girls," approved by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, aimed at mainstreaming menstrual hygiene. Various States, including Assam, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala, submitted affidavits detailing their respective schemes regarding sanitary napkin distribution and infrastructure. However, several States and Union Territories, including Uttar Pradesh and Delhi, did not file their affidavits. The Court examined whether the unavailability of these facilities violated the rights to equality, dignity, and education under Articles 14, 21, and 21A.
The Court stated that “education is a fundamental human right, as it ensures full and holistic development of a human being” and that “it is a right, not a charitable concession”. Regarding the specific barriers faced by girl students, the Bench observed that “the lack of MHM measures, such as non-access to toilets, non-availability of menstrual absorbents, and absence of a safe disposal mechanism… disproportionately affect the right to education of adolescent female students”.
On the aspect of equality, the Court observed that “substantive equality is brought into action through policies aiming to redress these systemic, direct or indirect disadvantages, by addressing the structural and contextual barriers that impede genuine equality”. The Bench further stated that “equal treatment afforded in isolation, or rather without accounting for such disadvantage, may perpetuate inequality”.
Connecting hygiene to dignity, the Court recorded that “MHM measures are inseparable from the right to live with dignity under Article 21” because “dignity cannot be reduced to an abstract ideal, it must find expression in conditions that enable individuals to live without humiliation, exclusion, or avoidable suffering”. The Court further observed that “the lack of resources cannot be permitted to govern her autonomy over her own body” and that a girl child “possesses the right to decide how and where menstrual care is carried out”.
Regarding the constitutional obligation, the Court stated that “the State is under an obligation to address them through appropriate measures” and that “failure to meet the minimum core threshold deprives the right of its substantive meaning and reduces the right to dead letters”. The Bench also noted that “the right to reproductive health implies that an adolescent female student should have access to safe, effective, and affordable MHM measures”.
Finally, regarding the educational environment, the Court observed that “inaccessibility of MHM measures strips away the right to participate on equal terms in school” and that “the domino effect of the absence of education is the inability to participate in all walks of life later”.
The Supreme Court directed that “All States and Union Territories shall ensure that every school, whether Government-run or privately managed, in both urban and rural areas, is provided with the functional, gender-segregated toilets with usable water connectivity”. The Court mandated that “all the existing and newly constructed toilets in schools shall be designed, constructed, and maintained so as to ensure privacy and accessibility, including by catering to the needs of children with disabilities”. Furthermore, “all school toilets shall be equipped with functional hand washing facilities, with soap and water available at all times”.
Regarding the availability of menstrual absorbents:“All States and Union Territories shall ensure that every school, whether Government-run or privately managed, in both urban and rural areas, provides oxo biodegradable sanitary napkins manufactured in compliance with the ASTM D-6954 standards free of cost”. These sanitary napkins “shall be made readily accessible to girl students, preferably within the toilet premises through sanitary napkin vending machines, or, where such installation is not immediately feasible, at a designated place or with a designated authority within the school”. Additionally, the Bench directed that schools “establish Menstrual Hygiene Management (MHM) corners” which “shall be equipped with, including but not limited to, spare innerwear, spare uniforms, disposable bags, and other necessary materials to address menstruation related exigencies”.
On the issue of disposal:“All States and Union Territories shall ensure that every school... is equipped with a safe, hygienic, and environmentally compliant mechanism for the disposal of sanitary napkins, in accordance with the latest Solid Waste Management Rules”. Specifically, “each toilet unit shall be equipped with a covered waste bin for the collection of sanitary material, and cleanliness and regular maintenance of such bins shall be ensured at all times”.
To address awareness and training: the “National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and the State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) shall incorporate gender responsive curricula, more particularly, on menstruation, puberty, and other related health concerns (PCOS, PCOD, etc.), with a view to break stigma and taboo associated with menstrual health and hygiene”.
“All teachers, whether male or female, shall be adequately trained and sensitized on menstrual hygiene, including appropriate ways of supporting and assisting menstruating students”. Information regarding the “availability of Jan Aushadhi Suvidha Oxo-Biodegradable Sanitary Napkin” and the “child helpline set up by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights” must be “widely disseminated through advertisement in social media, print media, radio advertisement, TV advertisement, cinema advertisement, and outdoor publicity”.
Regarding monitoring and compliance: “District Education Officer (DEO)” to “conduct periodic inspections, preferably once in a year, of school infrastructure”. While conducting such inspections, the DEO “must mandatorily obtain anonymous feedback in the form of a tailored survey from the students themselves and ensure that any further action taken pursuant to such a periodic inspection gives due regard to the responses received from such a survey”.
To ensure accountability: “the DEO must annex a copy of the report of the periodic inspection and a copy of the consolidated responses received from the student survey along with the notice which is to be issued under Rule 16(1)(a) of the RTE Rules”. The “National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR)” or the “State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR)” is requested to “oversee the implementation of the aforesaid directions” and “take necessary steps as provided under Sections 15 and 24 of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005” in case of non-compliance.
Finally, the Court issued a “continuing mandamus” and directed that “The Union of India and all the States and Union Territories respectively shall ensure that the aforesaid directions are strictly complied with within a period of three months from the date of the pronouncement of this judgment”. The Court clarified that “these directions, along with the Union’s Menstrual Hygiene Policy for School Girls, shall operate as mandatory standards in addition to the steps being taken by the States through its policies, schemes, programmes etc.”.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Advocate Varun Thakur
For the Respondents: ASG Aishwarya Bhati (Union)
Case Title: Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Government of India & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 97
Case Number: Writ Petition (C) No. 1000 of 2022
Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
