Summary
A public-interest petition sought payment under Jeevan Aadhar policies to disabled dependants during the proposer’s lifetime and amendment of Section 80DD. Applying the provision then in force, the Supreme Court upheld the rational basis of the post-death payment condition and declined to direct Parliament to amend it. Recognising possible hardship, it disposed of the petition by urging the Union to reconsider the provision and explore suitable amendments.
Issues
- Whether the post-death payment condition was discriminatory.
- Whether the Court could direct legislative amendment or earlier annuity payments.
- Whether hardship warranted policy reconsideration.
Provisions considered
- Section 80DD(1)–(3), as applicable to the petition, Income-tax Act, 1961The tax incentive and conditional insurance scheme aimed to secure the disabled dependant’s future after the subscriber’s death; the statutory condition could not be judicially rewritten. (¶¶ 2, 3, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23)
Held
- The provision encouraged parents and guardians to fund future maintenance after their death, on the premise that they would care for the dependant while alive. The payment condition had a rational connection with that objective and rested on reasonable classification. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
- The Court could examine constitutional validity but could not mandate that Parliament enact or amend legislation in a specified manner. The requested earlier payment conflicted with the statutory scheme then governing the policy. (¶ 18)
- Harsh situations could arise where an elderly or retired parent could no longer support the dependant despite having paid the full premium. Addressing those situations required legislative consideration; the Union was urged to re-examine the provision and explore suitable amendments. (¶¶ 22, 23)
Result
Petition disposed of with an exhortation to the Union to reconsider the provision and explore suitable amendments; no direction for legislative amendment or immediate earlier payment granted.