The Supreme Court recently expressed displeasure over States and Union Territories failing to respond to the Union Government on the steps taken to implement its directions to ensure menstrual hygiene facilities in schools, in the judgment recognising menstrual hygiene as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Court warned that it may issue contempt notices to the Chief Secretaries of the defaulting States if they fail to provide the requisite information before the next hearing.

A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan directed the Union Government to take up the issue seriously with every State and Union Territory and obtain written information detailing the measures taken to give effect to the judgment.

The Court observed that despite the Court declaring menstrual hygiene a facet of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, the judgment risked remaining “only on paper” if the directions were not implemented.

“We are sure the Union, the States/UTs have realized the importance of the judgment that we have delivered, declaring menstrual hygiene as a part of the Fundamental Right. In other words, we have declared menstrual hygiene/ menstrual health as one of the facets of Article 21 of the Constitution. If what we have said in the judgment is only going to remain on paper, how is the Union, States/UTs going to give effect to this Fundamental Right?” the Court observed.

The Court had in its January judgment directed the pan-India implementation of the Union Government's Menstrual Hygiene Policy for School-going Girls for students in Classes 6 to 12. The directions covered government and privately managed schools in both urban and rural areas.

Among other measures, the Court had directed States and Union Territories to ensure functional gender-segregated toilets with usable water connectivity, washing facilities with soap and water, and free access to sanitary napkins. It also directed schools to establish menstrual hygiene management corners equipped with spare innerwear, uniforms, disposable pads and other materials to address menstrual emergencies.

Pursuant to the Court's September 1 order, States and Union Territories had to report on the deficiencies identified in implementing its January 30 judgment. However, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati informed the Court that although the Union Government had taken up the issue seriously with all States and Union Territories, they had not responded to the Centre so far.

“We fail to understand that once the Union calls for the necessary information, why the States/UTs do not respond,” the Court said.

The Court stressed that the January judgment was intended to address the problem of girls giving up education because of difficulties in managing menstruation.

“Whatever we have done, we have done in the interest of young girls who are giving up education, more particularly, in remote parts of the country because of the problem of menstrual hygiene, etc.”, the Court observed.

The Court directed Union to study the judgment again and seek information on each aspect of its implementation, with particular attention to paragraphs 11 and 13 to 23 of the September 1 order.

In those paragraphs, the Court had flagged discrepancies in data on gender-segregated toilets, handwashing facilities, sanitary napkin vending machines and waste-disposal systems, and questioned whether the Union had adequately scrutinised the information submitted by States.

The Court had also stressed the need to address gaps in toilet maintenance and cleaning staff, and directed District Education Officers to constitute teams of teachers to conduct surprise inspections of schools. It had further directed States and UTs to focus subsequent compliance reports on the outstanding gaps, the reasons for them and the time required to address them, rather than merely listing achievements. The Court had also called for a gradual shift towards biodegradable, biocompatible and compostable sanitary napkins.

In its latest order, the Court asked the Union to prepare a questionnaire to obtain appropriate responses from each State and Union Territory.

“On the next date of hearing, if we hear from the Union that some of the States/UTs have not responded, we shall proceed further to issue notice of contempt to the concerned Chief Secretary of the State(s)”, the Court warned, granting “one last opportunity” to the states.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on December 14 at 2:30 PM.