The Supreme Court has questioned the way several States and Union Territories are reporting compliance with its directions on menstrual hygiene facilities in schools, saying figures submitted on paper do not always show whether students are actually receiving the required facilities.
A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, while reviewing the implementation of its January 2026 judgment in the Jaya Thakur case, said some responses from States and UTs appeared to be formal exercises rather than meaningful assessments of conditions in schools.
The Court has now asked authorities to focus their next reports on the gaps that remain instead of simply listing facilities that have already been provided.
Supreme Court Says Numbers Alone Are Not Enough
The January 30 judgment had directed nationwide implementation of the Centre’s Menstrual Hygiene Policy for School-going Girls for adolescent students from Classes 6 to 12.
The directions cover both government and privately managed schools and include functional gender-segregated toilets, usable water connections, handwashing facilities, free menstrual absorbents, menstrual hygiene management corners and safe disposal arrangements. The Court had also called for facilities accessible to children with disabilities.
The Union government’s latest affidavit showed that out of 39,439 girls’ toilets identified as needing to be made functional, 30,458 had been constructed. Another 4,236 were under construction, while 4,745 remained to be addressed.
The Union also reported progress in areas such as handwashing facilities, sanitary napkin distribution, MHM corners, vending machines and waste-disposal systems.
However, the Bench said these figures cannot by themselves establish that the facilities are available and usable at the school level.
States Asked To Report Their Remaining Gaps
The Court found inconsistencies in some of the information submitted by States and UTs.
In certain cases, authorities reported complete or near-complete coverage even though the figures supplied for specific facilities did not match the total number of schools.
The Court also examined discrepancies involving accessible toilets, handwashing facilities, sanitary-napkin vending machines and waste-disposal arrangements.
The Bench said authorities should distinguish between having a policy or issuing instructions and actually delivering the facilities to students.
For the next round of reporting, States and UTs have therefore been directed to identify schools where facilities are still missing. They must also explain the reason for each gap and provide an estimated timeline for fixing it.
Surprise School Inspections Ordered
The Supreme Court has also moved towards checking conditions directly on the ground.
District Education Officers have been directed to form teams of teachers to conduct surprise inspections of schools under their jurisdiction.
The teams will examine whether the facilities required under the Court’s earlier directions are actually available and functioning. The inspection process will also include student feedback.
The Court had earlier directed periodic inspections and anonymous feedback from students as part of monitoring menstrual hygiene facilities.
The latest direction is intended to give the Court a clearer picture of conditions inside schools rather than relying only on administrative reports.
Special Focus On Children With Disabilities
The Bench also stressed that schools and authorities must pay greater attention to students with special needs.
The Court noted that these children can face additional barriers in accessing school toilets and other facilities and said authorities should be more vigilant about ensuring accessibility.
The January judgment had already included accessibility and privacy requirements as part of the menstrual hygiene measures to be implemented in schools.
Court Changes Requirement For Sanitary Napkins
The Supreme Court has also changed its earlier requirement concerning the type of sanitary napkins to be supplied in schools.
The earlier direction referred to oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins meeting ASTM D-6954 standards. The Court has now directed that the requirement should instead cover biodegradable, biocompatible and compostable sanitary napkins complying with ISO 17088 read with IS 5405 standards.
The Court said States and UTs should gradually move towards environmentally friendly and scientifically validated menstrual products.
These could include biodegradable sanitary napkins, reusable or cloth-based products, menstrual cups and period underwear, with appropriate education on their use and precautions.
Menstrual Health Recognised As A Fundamental Right
The latest proceedings stem from the Supreme Court’s January 30 judgment, in which it held that menstrual health is connected with fundamental rights under the Constitution.
The Court said access to menstrual hygiene facilities is linked to education, health and dignity and directed governments to ensure that adolescent girls are not denied meaningful access to these basic facilities.
The Court’s latest intervention puts greater emphasis on whether the policy is actually working inside schools rather than simply whether governments have issued orders or reported high compliance percentages.
The matter is scheduled to come up again on September 29, when the Court is expected to review further progress.
