The Supreme Court of India has intervened in a matter concerning the rights of persons with disabilities, seeking responses from the Union Government and the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) on a petition calling for the implementation of disability-sensitive guidelines in welfare insurance schemes.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notices to the respondents on April 13, returnable within four weeks. The plea specifically targets the ‘Jeevan Aadhar’ policy and other similar welfare schemes, arguing that the current implementation fails to meet the constitutional guarantees of equality and the right to life.
The petition urges the Supreme Court to direct the LIC to frame and implement guidelines that are sensitive to the unique needs of persons with disabilities. Furthermore, it calls upon the Central Government to exercise policy oversight to ensure these insurance schemes align with Articles 14 (Equality before law) and 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.
The petitioners highlighted that beneficiaries with intellectual, mental, or congenital disabilities often face significant hurdles. Because these individuals may be unable to independently understand or assert their legal rights, the plea argues that claims should be decided through “reasoned, humane and non-mechanical decision-making processes” on a case-by-case basis.
The ‘Jeevan Aadhar’ policy is a specific focus of the litigation. Currently, the policy is offered to individuals with handicapped dependents who meet the criteria set under Section 80DDA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. While it provides lifelong insurance cover for the purchaser to support a dependent, the petition points out systemic flaws in how benefits are triggered.
Specifically, the plea seeks a directive for the LIC to automate the annuity process. It proposes that for persons with disabilities under the ‘Jeevan Aadhar’ scheme, the annuity should commence automatically once the policyholder reaches the age of 60 (or another specified age), rather than being tied to rigid or complex procedural requirements that may disadvantage the disabled beneficiary.
The legal argument rests on the intersection of tax law and fundamental rights:
- Section 80DDA: This section of the Income Tax Act allows for deductions regarding deposits made for the maintenance of a handicapped dependent.
- Constitutional Mandate: The petitioners argue that mechanical processing of insurance claims for the disabled violates the mandate of Article 21, which includes the right to live with dignity and adequate support.
By seeking a “humane” approach, the petition asks the judiciary to move the LIC away from standard contractual interpretations toward a framework that recognizes the vulnerability of the intended beneficiaries.
