Judgment Brief
Menstrual leave policy must be uniformly enforced
By ICS Desk
Case: SMT. CHANDRAVVA HANAMANT GOKAVI W/O HANAMANT GOKAVI vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA
The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, in a judgment by Justice M. Nagaprasanna on 15 April 2026, dealt with a petition by a hotel worker seeking effective implementation of Karnataka’s Menstrual Leave Policy.
The petitioner asked for a mandamus to ensure that the Government Order dated 20 November 2025 and the Gazette notification dated 12 November 2025 introducing the policy were implemented across establishments in Belagavi district, including hotels and small commercial units. She also sought directions for guidelines to secure uniform implementation, especially in the unorganised labour sector.
The Court recorded the petitioner’s case that women workers in physically demanding and unhygienic workplaces face particular hardship during menstruation. It also noted the State’s consultative process, including the committee constituted in 2024, the invitation of objections and suggestions, and the broad stakeholder response supporting a structured policy.
The judgment accepts that the policy is a beneficial measure aimed at workplace dignity, gender equity, and health. The Court observed that the unorganised sector requires a more facilitative mechanism, and that mere existence of the policy is not enough unless it is operationalised in a meaningful way.
The operative direction is clear. The Court disposed of the petition by directing strict and faithful implementation of the existing policy, pending formal enactment of the proposed legislation. It further held that until such enactment, the State must issue suitable guidelines, circulars, and administrative instructions to ensure uniform, consistent, and rigorous implementation across all sectors.
The Court also addressed the constitutional objection under Article 14. It said that men and women are equal in the eyes of law, but biologically distinct, and that recognising such differences in matters of health, dignity, and bodily autonomy does not violate equality. On the contrary, it gives substantive meaning to equality.
The practical takeaway is that Karnataka must move beyond policy declaration and ensure real-world enforcement of menstrual leave through uniform administrative action, including in the unorganised labour sector.
Appearances
Not available in the official judgment PDF.