Published Mar 27, 2026 | 11:35 AM ⚊ Updated Mar 27, 2026 | 11:35 AM
Karnataka High Court.
Synopsis: A group of 15 working women from different private companies have filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court challenging the state government’s menstrual leave policy. They said that the policy inadvertently labels women as less productive or more prone to absenteeism.
A group of 15 working women from different private companies have filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court challenging the state government’s menstrual leave policy.
The policy, the petitioners said, is a clear instance of benevolent sexism, where measures, though appearing protective, are rooted in paternalistic stereotypical assumptions about women’s capabilities, portraying them as weaker and less reliable employees.
“The policy is a clear instance of ‘benevolent sexism,’ where measures, though appearing protective, are rooted in paternalistic and stereotypical assumptions about women’s capabilities, portraying them as weaker and less reliable employees. This reinforces the very biases that women have fought for decades to overcome and will inevitably lead to discrimination against women in hiring and promotion,” they argued.
They further said that the policy, by singling out women for a specific biological function and mandating leave, inadvertently labels them as less productive or more prone to absenteeism, thereby making them less productive candidates for employers in a highly competitive job market, as claimed in the petition.
Additionally, they claimed that the policy is violative of Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty), which include the right to privacy and individual dignity, of the Constitution.
“The policy forces women to disclose a deeply personal and private matter about their menstrual cycle to their employer, which can lead to social stigma, disturbing questions, and a hostile work environment,” they said.
They said true gender equality in the workplace requires policies that foster an inclusive environment, address systemic barriers and provide universal support for health and well-being, rather than creating distinctions based on sex that can lead to further marginalisation.
This is the second legal challenge to Karnataka’s menstrual leave policy.
(With inputs from Anisha Reddy.)
