The Bengaluru Hotels Association has moved the Karnataka High Court against the recent state order introducing mandatory menstrual leave for women employees. The initial order, adding Karnataka to a list of states like Kerala, Odisha, and Bihar that have adopted similar leave policies, came into force on October 9.
The policy grants one day’s paid leave to women employees per month. As previously reported by The Indian Express, Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil had said at the time, “Since it is useful and has been successful (in other states), we have also adopted this leave policy.”
The government had also said in a statement, “It is a fundamental part of women’s rights and workplace welfare… the policy is an active step towards creating a conducive atmosphere for women to prioritise their health without considering it as a taboo or fearing consequences over the same.”
The Hotels Association noted in a statement that as of November 12, the government had passed a notification directing all establishments run under the Factories Act, 1948, the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961, the Plantations Labour Act, 1951, the Beedi and Cigar Workers Act, 1966, and the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961, to follow the above-mentioned policy.
In its petition, the Association stated that the notification is against natural justice, as the government had not issued any notice seeking opinions, etc, from stakeholders. It also argued that these laws do not have provisions that would enable the government to pass an order mandating leave in this way, and thus, the government could not have passed such an executive order.
The Association said in a statement to the press, “Granting of such leaves is within the exclusive domain of individual employers, to be governed by their internal HR policies… the Government cannot interfere in such administrative matters. It is also pointed out that the Government, one of the largest employers of women, has not extended menstrual leaves to its employees, rendering the notification arbitrary and discriminatory.”
The date for the hearing is yet to be set.