'Girls should not give up education': Supreme Court pushes Centre on school menstrual hygiene facilities

The Supreme Court on May 25 said girls should not be forced to abandon education because schools lack sanitary napkins or functional, gender-segregated toilets, while directing the Centre to ensure strict implementation of its earlier judgment on menstrual hygiene facilities in schools.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan observed that the January 30 ruling should be used “for the good of women and girls of this country”.

“Girls should not give up education and sit at home and do some domestic work only for this reason,” the bench said while hearing submissions from Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave, appearing for the Centre.

The Centre informed the court that the verdict had “led to galvanisation of efforts” across states and Union Territories. The court, however, directed the Union government to continue collecting compliance data from states and ensure that the directions are followed “in letter and spirit”.

The apex court said it would monitor compliance every three months and asked the Centre to submit fresh progress reports periodically. States and Union Territories have been directed to send updated status reports to the Centre by August 15, with the matter scheduled for further hearing on September 1.

In its landmark January 30 judgment, the court had ordered all states and Union Territories to provide free oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins to girl students and ensure the availability of “functional, gender-segregated toilets with usable water connectivity” in schools, including government, aided and private institutions.

The court had also ruled that access to menstrual hygiene forms part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, stating that “the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution includes the right to menstrual health”.

During Monday’s hearing, an advocate raised concerns over the use of the term “oxo-biodegradable” sanitary napkins in the judgment, claiming it may be environmentally harmful. The bench asked the Centre to examine the interim application and “take necessary steps”.