Karnataka High Court to Hear Pleas Against Menstrual Leave in January; State Defends Policy as Constitutional

The Karnataka government on Wednesday filed its detailed objections before the High Court to petitions challenging its November 12 notification mandating one day of paid menstrual leave per month for women employees in private industrial, commercial and other regulated establishments. After taking the objections on record, court posted the matter for a detailed hearing on January 20, 2026.

When the matter was taken up before the bench of Justice Jyoti M, the petitioners clarified that their challenge is confined to the notification applicable to private industrial establishments and does not extend to the state’s menstrual leave policy for government employees.

As the bench prepared to defer the matter to next week, Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty intervened to defend the state’s stand. He submitted that the policy is rooted in the constitutional obligation under Article 42, which requires the state to secure just and humane conditions of work for all labour, including women. He added that the menstrual leave decision is consistent with Article 14, arguing that women’s bodies require regeneration and pointing to Japan, which has recognised menstrual leave since the 1950s.

Appearing for the petitioners, Advocate Prashant BK reiterated that the issue was not the principle behind menstrual leave but the manner in which the notification had been issued. He argued that the Labour Commissioner had imposed the mandate without following the proper statutory framework, questioning whether such an executive authority could introduce a compulsory leave regime without stakeholder consultation or legislative backing.

Justice Jyoti M observed that the issue raises matters of public importance and involves questions of law that require a full hearing. The judge said the court intends to hear all stakeholders, including groups supporting the policy, and acknowledged that some unions have sought to be impleaded in the case.

The bench then recorded that the state’s objections had been filed and taken on record, and that the petitioners may file a rejoinder, if necessary. Court made it clear that no substantive orders would be passed until the detailed hearing is conducted after the winter vacation.

The matter will next be heard on January 20, 2026.

Yesterday morning, the High Court stayed the impugned notification. However, by the afternoon, it kept that order in abeyance to give the state an opportunity to place its stand on record. The court then scheduled the matter for hearing today.

The petitioners contend that the menstrual-leave mandate has no basis in existing labour laws and that the Labour Commissioner exceeded his authority by imposing a compulsory leave policy without legislative backing or stakeholder consultation. They say leave structures are already provided under various labour statutes and do not include menstrual leave. They also contend that making such leave mandatory for private establishments alone is arbitrary and could adversely affect women’s employability.

Case Title: The Bangalore Hotels Association vs Government of Karnataka and connected matters

Order Date: December 10, 2025

Bench: Justice Jyoti M