The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to entertain a petition demanding mandatory menstrual leave for working women and students nationwide, warning that legislating such a provision could discourage employers from hiring women altogether.

A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant expressed serious reservations while dismissing the plea, observing that mandating menstrual leave through judicial order could produce unintended consequences far outweighing its benefits. The court cautioned that employers — both in the public and private sectors — may begin avoiding hiring women if such a leave entitlement became legally enforceable, potentially jeopardising rather than protecting women's career prospects.

"We do not want any decision meant to benefit women to ultimately limit their opportunities," the bench underscored.

The Supreme Court directed the petitioners to engage with the Union Ministry of Women and Child Development, noting that the issue had already been brought to the ministry's attention. The bench stressed that framing such policy requires broad stakeholder consultation — a legislative and executive responsibility, not a judicial one.

Justice Surya Kant acknowledged that voluntary menstrual leave offered by companies was commendable, but drew a firm line against mandating it through court orders.

The petition had argued that menstrual leave deserved statutory recognition on par with maternity leave, citing examples of several Indian states and private firms already offering two paid days off per month during menstruation.