Case Name: Jaya Thakur v. Government of India & Ors.

Factual Background

The matter arose in continuation of the Supreme Court’s directions concerning menstrual hygiene and school infrastructure in its main judgment dated 30 January 2026. The present order was concerned with the progress reported by the States and Union Territories towards implementation of those directions. By an earlier order dated 25 May 2026, the Court had called for fresh reports from all States/UTs regarding compliance and had also sought examination of the material used for sanitary napkins supplied to school-going girls.

The Union Government placed an affidavit dated 31 August 2026 before the Court. It reported substantial progress in the availability of gender-segregated toilets, water connectivity, sanitary napkins, menstrual hygiene management (MHM) corners, disposal systems, awareness programmes and teacher sensitisation. Of the 39,439 girls’ toilets identified as requiring action, 30,458 had reportedly been constructed and 4,236 were under construction, leaving a reported gap of 4,745 toilets. Several States/UTs also reported distribution of free sanitary napkins, installation of vending machines, establishment of MHM corners and provision of disposal facilities.

However, the Court found significant deficiencies in the way compliance was being reported. Several States claimed “full coverage” despite the figures in their own reports indicating that the number of schools covered was lower than the total number of schools. The Court also noted deficiencies concerning accessible toilets for children with special needs, handwashing facilities, sanitary napkin availability, vending machines and disposal systems.

Court’s Analysis

A significant issue before the Court concerned the material composition of sanitary napkins. The January 2026 judgment had directed States and UTs to provide free oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins complying with ASTM D-6954 standards. During the present proceedings, the Indian Compostable Polymer Association highlighted that oxo-biodegradable materials

may break down into microplastics and nanoplastics, particularly where appropriate environmental conditions for complete degradation are absent.

The Court consequently distinguished between compostable, biodegradable and oxo-biodegradable materials. It observed that biodegradable and compostable sanitary napkins made from materials such as bamboo, jute, banana, starch and corn could provide a more sustainable alternative. It emphasised both potential health considerations and the environmental consequences associated with menstrual waste, particularly given inadequate segregation, limited waste-processing infrastructure and existing practices such as open dumping, burial and incineration.

The Court therefore modified its earlier direction: the requirement of “oxo-biodegradable sanitary napkins manufactured in compliance with ASTM D-6954 standards” was directed to be read as requiring “biodegradable, biocompatible and compostable sanitary napkins in compliance with ISO 17088 read with IS 5405 standards.” The responsibility for ensuring that such products were safe and effective was placed upon the States/UTs.

The Court further stressed that compliance could not be demonstrated merely through the existence of government policies, circulars or numerical statistics. It specifically observed that the existence of a policy is different from the policy actually reaching its intended beneficiaries.

Order of the Court

The Court directed that the manner of compliance reporting be changed. District Education Officers were directed to form teams of teachers to conduct surprise inspections of schools within their jurisdiction and assess compliance with the Court’s earlier directions.

For future reporting, States/UTs were directed to identify gaps rather than merely report achievements. Reports must identify, among other things, schools lacking gender-segregated functional toilets, usable water connectivity, accessibility and privacy, together with the reasons for such gaps and the time required to bridge them.

The Court also emphasised the importance of anonymous student feedback during inspections and directed that such feedback be given due consideration in subsequent action.

Written by Adv. K. Sri Hamsa