"Take This Very Seriously": Supreme Court Slams States and UTs Over Menstrual Hygiene Rights, Warns of Contempt Notices

The Supreme Court has come down heavily on states and Union Territories for failing to report on how they are implementing its landmark ruling that recognised menstrual hygiene as part of the right to life. A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, in an order passed on October 13, 2026, gave the states and Union Territories one last opportunity to respond and warned that Chief Secretaries could face contempt notices if they stay silent.

The Court's Displeasure

The matter came up after Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati told the court that the Union government had written to all states and Union Territories seeking details of how the judgment is being implemented, but had received no response. The bench said it could not understand why states and Union Territories do not respond once the Union calls for the necessary information. It asked how the right declared by the court would be given effect if the judgment is only going to remain on paper. The judges said they were sure that the Union, states and Union Territories had realised the importance of the ruling, which was meant to help young girls, particularly in remote areas, who give up their education because of problems linked to menstrual hygiene.

The Warning of Contempt

The court made clear that the consequences of silence would be serious. It said that if, on the next date of hearing, the Union reports that some states or Union Territories have still not responded, it will proceed to issue notice of contempt to the concerned Chief Secretaries. The bench also issued fresh directions to the Union to secure compliance and listed the matter for further hearing on December 14, 2026.

The January 30 Judgment

The proceedings arise from a petition by Dr Jaya Thakur, in which the court delivered a landmark judgment on January 30, 2026. The court held that the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution includes the right to menstrual health. It directed pan-India implementation of the Union's Menstrual Hygiene Policy for School-going Girls for students in Classes 6 to 12 in both government and private schools, urban and rural. Every school was directed to provide biodegradable sanitary napkins free of cost to adolescent girls, with a specific material standard, and to have functional, hygienic, gender-segregated toilets. Compliance was made mandatory, and private schools were warned that they could face derecognition if they failed to provide separate toilets or free sanitary pads.

Earlier Criticism of Formal Responses

This is not the first time the bench has expressed unhappiness. In an order passed on September 1, the court found that several states and Union Territories had treated the matter as a formality and filed compliance reports without applying their minds. It noted that where subjective explanations were required, some states had given mere statistics or yes-or-no answers. After examining the affidavits, the court acknowledged some progress but found that several claims of complete compliance were contradicted by the states' own data.

Why It Matters

Lack of toilets, absence of sanitary products and the stigma around menstruation have long been linked to girls missing school or dropping out, especially in rural and underserved regions. Health and education experts say that a court order is only the first step and that effective implementation depends on budgets, supply chains, training of teachers and monitoring at the district level. The court's insistence on detailed reports rather than numbers suggests that it wants to know what is happening on the ground.

The next hearing in December will show how many states have complied and whether the court follows through on its warning. For millions of schoolgirls, the outcome could determine whether the right declared in January becomes a practical reality in their classrooms.

This report is based on published news coverage of the Supreme Court's orders. The orders themselves should be consulted for exact wording.