SC REFUSES TO HEAR PIL ON MENSTRUAL LEAVE
A Public Interest Litigation was filed with the Supreme Court on Menstrual leave. The apex court first agreed to take up the PIL and said “will hear it in a week”. However, recently the SC refused to take the PIL. According to SC, creating laws or passing judgement on such leaves will become a deterrent to women’s employment. Also, the Supreme Court added that the solution is in the hands of the government. And asked the petitioner to approach the Women and child development ministry.
Contents
• Background
• Can Supreme Court choose cases?
Background
State Governments like Kerala and other countries have been creating laws on menstrual leave. Spain introduced the Menstrual law recently. Many Indian companies like Swiggy and Zomato are offering menstrual leave. Some women experience a condition called dysmenorrhea that causes pain during menstruation. Up to 80% of women do not experience problems sufficient to disrupt daily functioning as a result of menstruation, although they may report having some issues prior to menstruation.
Symptoms interfere with normal life, qualifying as premenstrual syndrome, in 20 to 30% of women. In 3 to 8%, symptoms are severe. Premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) is a severe and disabling form of premenstrual syndrome affecting
1.8–5.8% of menstruating women.
Can Supreme Court choose cases?
The power of SC to choose cases is called its jurisdiction. There are three different types of jurisdictions. Original jurisdiction, Appellate jurisdiction, and Writ Jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction means the cases that were directly filed in SC and not originated from other lower courts. Under writ jurisdiction, SC can issue orders and directions. Under the appellate jurisdiction, the apex court hears appeals that are against the lower courts.