Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court adjudicated a public interest petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 60(4) of the Code on Social Security, 2020, which limits maternity benefit to adoptive mothers only if the adopted child is below three months of age. The petitioner, an adoptive mother of two children, contended that the provision discriminates against women who adopt older children and violates fundamental rights. The original challenge was against Section 5(4) of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, but during pendency, the 2020 Code came into force, consolidating social security laws. The petitioner amended the petition to impugn Section 60(4). The core legal issues were whether the age limit violates the right to equality under Article 14 and the right to life, including reproductive autonomy and child welfare, under Article 21. The petitioner argued that the three-month age limit creates an arbitrary classification with no rational nexus to the object of maternity benefit, overlooks the lengthy adoption procedure that often makes the provision unworkable, and denies both the mother and child holistic care. The respondent Union of India defended the provision as a balanced measure, arguing that children above three months have less intensive dependency and that creche facilities are available. The Court, after analyzing maternity protection as a basic human right rooted in international conventions and domestic law, held that the age restriction fails the test of permissible classification under Article 14, as it unjustly excludes adoptive mothers of children aged three months or above without reasonable differentiation. It further held that the provision violates Article 21 by impinging on the adoptive mother's reproductive autonomy and the child's right to full development and integration into the family. The Court also noted that the statutory timelines for adoption render the provision otiose. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and Section 60(4) was declared unconstitutional to the extent it caps the age of the adopted child at three months, thus removing the discriminatory bar.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Equality under Article 14 - Permissible Classification - Section 60(4), Code on Social Security, 2020 - The provision limits maternity benefit to adoptive mothers of child below three months, creating an artificial classification with no rational nexus to the object of maternity protection, thus violating Article 14. Held, age limit is arbitrary and discriminatory. B) Constitutional Law - Right to Life under Article 21 - Reproductive Autonomy and Child Welfare - Section 60(4), Code on Social Security, 2020 - Denial of maternity benefit to mothers adopting children above three months infringes the adoptive mother's right to reproductive autonomy and the adopted child's right to holistic care and integration, violating Article 21. Held, the provision fails to secure the best interest of the child. C) Statutory Interpretation - Workability of Provision - Adoption Procedure Timelines - Section 60(4), Code on Social Security, 2020 - The legal process for adoption under the Juvenile Justice Act and CARA Regulations takes at least three months, rendering the three-month age limit practically unworkable and otiose. Held, the provision fails to account for statutory adoption timelines. D) Maternity Benefit - Human Right - International and Domestic Framework - Maternity Benefit Act, 1961/Code on Social Security, 2020 - Maternity protection is a basic human right recognized internationally and statutorily, aimed at supporting women's economic security and child development. Held, any restriction must be rationally connected to this objective.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the age limit of three months under Section 60(4) of the Code on Social Security, 2020 violates Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. Section 60(4) of the Code on Social Security, 2020 is declared unconstitutional to the extent it limits maternity benefit to women adopting a child below the age of three months, being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
Law Points
- Maternity protection is a basic human right
- Age limit of three months for adoptive mothers creates arbitrary classification violating Article 14
- Adoption is an expression of reproductive autonomy protected under Article 21
- Best interest of the child requires holistic care and integration irrespective of age
- Statutory provision rendered otiose due to adoption process timelines
- Right to carry on trade occupation and business under Article 19(1)(g) cannot be restricted based on child's age
- Social security benefits must be inclusive and non-discriminatory
