Read Time: 17 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on January 15, 2025, said toilets, washrooms, and restrooms are not merely a matter of convenience, but a basic necessity which is a facet of human rights.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan issued comprehensive directions, including to the High Courts and the State Governments / UTs to ensure the construction and availability of separate toilet facilities for males, females, PwD, and transgender persons in all court premises and tribunals across the country.

"Courts should not be places, where basic needs, such as sanitation, are overlooked and neglected. The absence of adequate washroom facilities undermines equality and poses a barrier to the fair administration of justice," the bench said.

On a PIL filed by Rajeeb Kalita, a practicing advocate, the bench said all high courts must take swift and effective action to address this issue.

"Immediate steps are needed to ensure that all judicial premises, especially those lacking proper facilities, are equipped with accessible washroom facilities for the judges, litigants, advocates, and staff. It is re-emphasized that this is not just a matter of convenience, but is about basic rights and human dignity. Failing to act promptly would compromise the very purpose and essence of the judiciary’s role in our society," the bench said.

The court emphasised that access to proper sanitation is recognised as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

"This right inherently includes ensuring a safe and hygienic environment for all individuals. There is a discernible duty on every State/UT under Part IV of the Constitution to ensure a healthy environment and to continuously strive of improving the public health," the bench said.

Court underscored access to justice includes the creation of a pleasant and humanly atmosphere for all the stakeholders in the dispensation of justice.

"The litigants for fear of sitting in courts for long hours without access to basic amenities should not be forced to refrain from exercising their legal rights. Therefore, High Court premises must be equipped with proper washroom facilities for judges, advocates, litigants and staff members, just as required in other public places," the bench said.

Additionally, the court said, it is equally essential to ensure that these facilities are adequately provided, maintained and accessible to everyone, sans discomfort or inconvenience.

As regards the district courts, the bench said, "We must also point out our deep concerns that there are instances where even judges, particularly, in rural areas, still lack access to proper washroom facilities. This not only violates the rights of those directly affected but also tarnishes the reputation of the judicial system, which should serve as a model of fairness, dignity, and justice."

Court opined the failure to provide adequate washroom facilities is not just a logistical issue, but it reflects a deeper flaw in the justice system.

"The sorry state of affairs indicates the harsh reality that the judicial system has not entirely fulfilled its constitutional obligation to provide a safe, dignified, and equal environment for all those seeking justice," the bench said.

Having received responses, the court pointed out, various high courts have not provided toilets for transgenders with only a few exceptions.

"There is no concrete statistical data regarding the availability of toilets for differently abled persons and separate toilets for lady judicial officers in their chambers situated within the Court premises. Furthermore, there is a lack of transparency concerning the availability of funds and the timeline for construction of toilet facilities," the bench said.

Referring to the Constitution, international laws, case laws and global overview, the bench said that public health is of paramount importance and clean public toilets contribute to the health and overall well-being of the society.

"Also, the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights. It is settled law that the right to life encompasses within it the right to healthy and hygienic life and the right to live with dignity. Creation of adequate public toilets also protects the privacy and removes the threat to ladies and transgender persons," the bench said.

It said availability of access to public toilets is an important duty of the States/UTs under the Directive Principles and it is just not enough if such provisions are made but steps are to be taken to ensure that the toilets are maintained throughout the year.

"Without such access to the three genders, the States/UTs can no longer claim to be welfare State," the bench said.

Court said the need for toilets/washrooms/restrooms is even more acute for judges/advocates/ litigants/ staff members working in large numbers in the courts and tribunals as they are mostly struck in one place for longer periods because of the demands of the job and the system in the function of the courts/tribunals.

"Therefore, it is the duty of the Government and local authorities to provide basic toilet and sanitation facilities within the Court premises and ensure that they are constructed, maintained and kept in a hygienic condition for men, women, PwD, and transgender persons," the bench said.

Court found that there is no concrete statistical data regarding the availability of toilets for differently abled persons and separate toilets for lady judicial officers in their chambers situated within the court premises. Furthermore, there is a lack of transparency concerning the availability of funds and the timeline for construction of toilet facilities, it noted.

"The conditions prevailing in many courts are poor with old toilets in unusable conditions, insufficient water supply, unlocked doors, broken taps, etc. Due to insufficient funds, toilets are not properly maintained. Even in newly constructed buildings, non-functional fittings hinder the proper use of toilet facilities. District Courts are in the worst and most deplorable conditions and failing to meet even basic hygiene standards. The number of toilets required have to be ascertained taking into account the number of judicial officers, advocates, staff and the litigants approaching the courts," the bench said.

It also pointed out that toilets in several high courts are inadequate with non-functional hand dryers, handwash, toilet paper, and napkins, etc. Additionally, the toilets and corridors in most courts are not designed to accommodate the needs of PwD. For instance, there are no tactile pavements in corridors or toilets to assist visually impaired individuals, leaving them without proper guidance. Similarly, facilities are inadequate or inaccessible for persons using wheelchairs, creating significant challenges in navigation and usage.

Moreover, the absence of creche facilities in several courts poses challenges for single mother advocates who require such support while attending court proceedings. The issue of providing sanitary napkins and dispensers remains unresolved in some high courts. More importantly, there is no user- friendly system in place to report complaints and maintenance issues. Therefore, the shortcomings and deficiencies pointed out require urgent attention and immediate steps must necessarily be taken to ensure sustainable development, the bench said.

Among its directions, the court ordered a committee should be constituted in each of the high courts under the chairmanship of a judge nominated by the chief justice and members comprising the registrar general/registrar of the high court, the chief secretary, the PWD secretary and the finance secretary of the State, a representative of the bar association and any other officers as they deem it fit, within a period of six weeks. The committee should formulate a comprehensive plan to ensure the availability of toilet facilities, lacunae in the infrastructure and their maintenance.

The court also directed the State Governments / UTs to allocate sufficient funds for construction, maintenance and cleanliness of the toilet facilities within the court premises, which should be periodically reviewed in consultation with the committee constituted by the high courts.

Court sought a status report from all the high courts and the States/UTs within a period of four months.

Case Title: Rajeeb Kalita Vs Union of India & Ors