Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | W.P.(C) No.-001000 – 2022 |
| Diary Number | 35023/2022 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA |
| Bench | J.B. PARDIWALA & R. MAHADEVAN, JJ. |
| Precedent Value | Binding authority |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms existing precedent |
| Type of Law | Constitutional law; Right to Education |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that menstrual hygiene management (MHM) is integral to substantive equality under Article 14, to dignity and privacy under Article 21, and to free and compulsory quality education under Article 21A and the RTE Act. Failure to provide gender-segregated toilets with water, free sanitary pads, safe disposal mechanisms and awareness programmes creates structural and financial barriers to regular school attendance, participation and learning. Barrier-free access in Section 19 of the RTE Act extends beyond mere entry to include all enabling conditions for continuous education. States have a positive constitutional obligation to comply with RTE norms, or else face derecognition and child-rights commission oversight. |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
A social-worker petitioner filed a public interest petition under Article 32 seeking directives for free sanitary pads to girls in classes 6–12, separate female toilets, dedicated cleaners and MHM awareness in all government and aided schools. The petition identified menstrual poverty as the cause of absenteeism and drop-out. The Union and Respondent States filed affidavits detailing various MHM policies and schemes but admitted inconsistent and ineffective implementation. The Court framed four issues on equality, dignity, participation and the right to free and compulsory education. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts; Union, States and UTs in enforcing RTE-MHM standards |
| Persuasive For | High Courts and tribunals in school-infrastructure and fundamental-rights litigation |
| Overrules | None |
| Distinguishes | Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India (2012) in light of Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust (2014) |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The Court formally integrates menstrual hygiene management into Articles 14 (substantive equality), 21 (dignity and privacy) and 21A (right to education), imposing positive State obligations.
- Free education under Section 3 of the RTE Act includes removal of any financial barrier—such as the cost of sanitary pads—that impedes attendance or completion of elementary schooling.
- “Barrier-free access” in Section 19 of the RTE Act is interpreted to cover all enabling conditions—clean toilets, water, hygiene supplies—beyond mere entry to the school building.
- Norms and standards in the RTE Act Schedule (gender-segregated toilets, drinking water, mid-day meal kitchens, barrier-free design) are mandatory for all schools; non-compliance leads to derecognition.
- The judgment issues a continuing mandamus: District Education Officers must conduct annual audits, gather anonymous student feedback, and report to child-rights commissions.
- Provides binding authority for quashing petitions and seeking mandamus to enforce MHM measures as fundamental-rights compliance in education writs.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Right to Education: Education is a “multiplier right” implicit in Article 21 and explicit in Article 21A; essential for dignity, political participation and development.
- Substantive Equality (Art. 14): Mere formal nondiscrimination fails where structural disadvantages persist. Affirmative State measures are required to remove barriers—here, those posed by menstruation.
- Dignity & Privacy (Art. 21): Human dignity includes bodily autonomy and the right to manage natural functions in privacy; lack of MHM facilities violates the right to a life lived with dignity.
- Health & Reproductive Rights: Article 21 incorporates the right to health and reproductive health; sanitary products and disposal facilities are integral to menstrual health.
- Participation & Opportunity: Equality encompasses the right to participate and compete on equal terms; MHM deficiencies cause absenteeism, drop-outs and lost opportunities.
- RTE Act Section 3: Guarantees free and compulsory education by removing all charges or expenses—including MHM costs—that could impede a child’s schooling.
- RTE Act Section 19 & Schedule: Schools must provide barrier-free access, separate toilets, drinking water, mid-day meal kitchens and playgrounds; binding on Government and private schools alike.
- Remedial Mandamus: Directs concrete State action—free sanitary pads, toilets with water, incinerators, awareness programmes—and ongoing monitoring by DEOs and child-rights commissions.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Menstrual poverty, absence of free sanitary pads and separate facilities leads to absenteeism and drop-out.
- Lack of MHM measures breaches fundamental rights to equality, dignity, privacy and education.
- Existing policies are insufficiently implemented; judicial intervention needed for effective compliance.
Respondents (Union & States)
- Acknowledge taboos and limited access to sanitary products; cite numerous schemes (Jan Aushadhi pads, Samagra Shiksha, school vending machines, incinerators, awareness programmes).
- Point to policy initiatives (Menstrual Hygiene Policy, State-level projects) but admit inconsistent on-ground implementation.
- Note financial, logistical and capacity constraints in universal rollout.
Factual Background
A public-interest petition under Article 32 sought mandamus for free sanitary pads to girls in classes 6–12, separate toilets, dedicated cleaners and staged awareness programmes in all government, aided and residential schools. Menstruation-related taboos and menstrual poverty were linked to rising absenteeism and dropout rates. The Union and several States filed affidavits describing existing MHM schemes but conceded gaps in consistent execution.
Statutory Analysis
- Article 14: Substantive equality demands positive steps to eliminate systemic barriers—such as school MHM deficiencies—that impede equal participation.
- Article 21: Right to life with dignity includes privacy, bodily autonomy and health; menstrual health falls within the right to health and reproductive autonomy.
- Article 21A: Fundamental right to free and compulsory elementary education of satisfactory quality for ages 6–14.
- RTE Act Section 3: No fees, charges or expenses—including MHM costs—should prevent a child from pursuing or completing elementary education.
- RTE Act Section 19 & Schedule: Mandates minimum norms and standards for all schools (barrier-free access, separate toilets, drinking water, kitchen, playground, fencing); non-compliance entails derecognition.
- RTE Rules: Require self-declaration, periodic compliance audits by District Education Officers, and de-recognition for schools failing to conform to the Schedule within three years.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Affirms and applies established jurisprudence on substantive equality, dignity, privacy and the RTE Act.
- 📅 Time-Sensitive – States must comply with three-month deadline for implementation of directed MHM measures.