Swarnalatha J & Anr. vs. Union Of Of INDIA & Anr.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Swarnalatha J & Anr., filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging the levy of 5% GST on clinical diapers. They contended that clinical diapers are essential for persons with disabilities and medical conditions, and thus cannot be classified as luxury items. They drew a parallel to sanitary pads, which are exempted from GST. The respondents, Union of India & Anr., raised a preliminary objection regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. The petitioners sought a decision on their representation dated September 3, 2025, requesting exemption of clinical diapers from GST.
Held
The Court acknowledged the preliminary objection raised by the respondents regarding territorial jurisdiction but chose not to delve into it at this stage, keeping the issue open for future consideration. The Court directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated September 3, 2025, submitted by the petitioners, which included the arguments presented in the writ petition regarding the GST levy on clinical diapers. The respondents were instructed to communicate their decision within a reasonable period, preferably within six months from the date of the order. The petition was disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioners to approach the Court again if the decision of the respondents was adverse to their interests or those of similarly placed persons. The Court did not make any specific finding on the merits of the GST levy itself, deferring the substantive issues.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition challenging the levy of GST on clinical diapers, considering the nature of the challenge and the arguments presented by the respondents. 2. Whether clinical diapers, used by persons with disabilities and medical conditions, should be exempted from GST, similar to sanitary pads, as they are not luxury items but a compulsive necessity. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued that clinical diapers are a necessity for a specific class of persons with disabilities and medical conditions, and therefore, should not be subjected to GST. They highlighted that sanitary pads, which serve a similar purpose of hygiene, are exempted from GST, suggesting an inconsistency in tax treatment. They relied on the fact that the item is not a luxury good. Revenue's Arguments: The respondents raised a preliminary objection concerning the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court to hear the matter.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2026
Heard.
The counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to the territorial juri iction qua the right of the petitioner to question the levying of 5% GST on clinical diapers.
The contentions are, the clinical diapers are used by the persons with certain disabilities including medical disabilities or a medical disability. As such, a particular class of persons are in almost compulsive need of the same This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/02/2026 at 13:17:42
and in any case same cannot be termed as a luxury item.
Our attention is invited to the fact that the sanitary pads are exempted from the clutches of GST.
As such it is claimed that the respondents must consider and take decision as regards the representation preferred by the petitioners where the exemption to be granted to the aforesaid item from the clutches of GST.
As regards the issue of territorial juri iction is concerned, having regard to the issue canvassed in the present petition, we deem it appropriate not to go into the said issue and keep the said issue open to be considered at an appropriate stage of the proceedings.
However, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 03rd September, 2025 preferred by the petitioner including that of the pleadings which are raised in the present petition and communicate its decision within a reasonable period of time which in our opinion preferably within a period of six months from today.
In view of above, the petition stands disposed of.
Liberty to approach afresh in case if the representation of the decision of the respondent is adverse to the interest of the petitioner or similarly placed persons. NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J AJAY DIGPAUL, J FEBRUARY 12, 2026/ab/ok This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/02/2026 at 13:17:42
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.