Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka High Court Paid Menstrual Leave Policy Order: December 9, 2025 Bengaluru: In a dramatic turn of events on Tuesday, the Karnataka High Court recalled an interim order it had passed earlier in the day staying the State government’s new policy granting one day of paid menstrual leave per month to women employees across various establishments.
Justice Jyoti M withdrew the stay order after Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty mentioned the matter before the High Court shortly before lunch and urged reconsideration. The judge agreed, recalling the morning order and posting the case for further hearing on Wednesday.
The stay had been issued on a petition filed by the Bangalore Hotels Association, which challenged the State’s authority to mandate menstrual leave through an executive notification. The association argued that the notification failed to cite the statutory provision under which it was issued and imposed an undue compulsory obligation on employers.
READ: How Impeachment of Judges Works in India — Process, History, and the Latest Cases
Justice Jyoti M, Karnataka High Court.
According to the policy, menstrual leave is applicable to all industries and establishments registered under several labour statutes, including the Factories Act, 1948, Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961, Plantation Labour Act, 1951, Beedi and Cigar Workers (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1966, and the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961.
The petitioners contended that these laws already contain adequate mechanisms for leave and welfare measures. They argued that mandating menstrual leave would place an additional financial burden on businesses and should have been formulated only after consultations with affected stakeholders.
READ: Over 100 MPs Move Impeachment Motion Against Madras High Court Judge GR Swaminathan
After initial submissions by Advocate Prashant BK for the association, the Court had granted interim relief, staying the government notification and seeking the State’s response. However, the Advocate General later intervened and requested the Court to revisit the order, leading to its recall.
The matter will now continue on Wednesday, when the Court is expected to hear more detailed arguments from both sides.
