Swarnalatha J & Anr. Vs Union of of India & Anr. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Swarnalatha J & Anr. Vs Union of of India & Anr. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representation dated 03.09.2025 (including the pleadings raised in the writ petition) and communicate the decision, preferably within six months; liberty to approach afresh if the decision is adverse to the petitioners or similarly placed persons.

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court has territorial jurisdiction qua the petitioner's right to question the levying of 5% GST on clinical diapers. +1 more

Court's answer

On the preliminary objection of territorial jurisdiction, the Court deemed it appropriate not to go into the said issue and kept it open to be considered at an appropriate stage of the proceedings.

Ratio / Principle

The Court directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 03.09.2025 preferred by the petitioner, including the pleadings raised in the present petition, and to communicate its decision within a reasonable period, preferably within six months.

Key takeaways

Liberty was granted to the petitioners to approach afresh in case the decision on the representation is adverse to the interest of the petitioner or similarly placed persons.ratio¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

GST - clinical diapers taxed at 5% - writ petition (W.P.(C) 1978/2026, High Court of Delhi) by Swarnalatha J & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. - petitioners contended clinical diapers are of compulsive need for persons with disabilities (including medical disabilities) and not a luxury item, noting sanitary pads are exempted from GST - respondents raised preliminary objection of territorial jurisdiction - Court expressly left the territorial jurisdiction issue open to be considered at an appropriate stage - Court directed respondents to consider and decide petitioners' representation dated 03.09.2025, including pleadings raised in the petition, and communicate the decision, preferably within six months - petition disposed of - liberty to approach afresh if the decision is adverse to petitioners or similarly placed persons - Bench: Nitin Wasudeo Sambre & Ajay Digpaul, JJ. - order dated 12.02.2026.

$~52

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 1978/2026

SWARNALATHA J & ANR. .....Petitioners

Through: Ms. Shyel Trehan, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rishabh Sharma, Ms. Ambica Sood, Mr. Rohan Poddar, Ms. Vidhi Jain, Mr. Rahul E & Ms. Karuvaki Mohanty, Advs.

versus

UNION OF OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Amartya Singh, Senior Panel Counsel for R-1. Mr.Piyush Beriwal with Ms. Ruchita Srivastava, Ms. Neha Kamboj, Mr.Dev Aaseri, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R % 12.02.2026

Heard.

The counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to the territorial jurisdiction 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 jurisdiction 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 03^rd 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