The Supreme Court recently issued show-cause notices to the Chief Secretaries of all States/Union Territories over their failure to file reply/compliance affidavits in a matter pertaining to distribution of sanitary napkins through Fair Price Shops.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed the order, calling on the Chief Secretaries to show cause as to why cost of Rs. 25000 be not imposed on the states/UTs over their failure to file the affidavits.

Briefly stated, the case pertains to distribution of sanitary napkins through Fair Price Shops. The petitioner, a social worker, seeks directions to ensure that Jan Aushadhi Suvidha oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins, manufactured and supplied under the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaudhadhi Pariyojana, are made available for distribution through the Fair Price Shop network to ration card holders covered under the National Food Security Act, 2013.

The petition points out that the Jan Aushadhi Suvidha oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins scheme was launched by Government of India on June 4, 2018, making environmentally responsible sanitary pads available at Rs. 2.50 per pad through Jan Aushadhi Kendras across the country. Subsequently, sanitary napkins were exempted from GST on July 27, 2018 and their price was further reduced to Rs.1 per pad on August 27, 2019.

However, the petitioner claims, the objective of the scheme remains underachieved as Jan Aushadhi Kendras (19294 outlets) are concentrated in urban and semi urban areas. It is highlighted that in contrast, 4,78,773 Fair Price Shops under the Public Distribution System are present in every village and locality, serving the demographic which NFHS-5 identifies as most excluded.

"The Government's own scheme has not reached these populations not because of any failure of vision, but because the delivery mechanism has not yet extended to the infrastructure that already reaches them every month", the plea states.

The petitioner underlines the authorities' constitutional obligations under Articles 14, 15(3), 21, 21A and 47 of the Constitution and the statutory obligations under the National Food Security Act, 2013. She further highlights the decision in Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Government of India, where the Supreme Court held right to menstrual health to be an integral part of Article 21.

It is pointed out that the judgment in Jaya Thakur case was confined to the school system. Relying on NFHS-5, the petitioner says that while use of sanitary napkins has increased as a result of government interventions, nearly half of the adolescent girls still use cloth. The rural-urban gap persists at 17 percentage points. "The problem is not of demand, it is of reach", the plea avers.

Case: SAROJ BALA v. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS., WP(C) No. 691/2026

Click here to read order

Related - Supreme Court Expresses Dissatisfaction With States' Compliance On Menstrual Hygiene In Schools