Constitution of India Article 14-Clause in term insurance policy restricting it to persons employed in government, semi-government and reputed commercial firms-Held, clause unconstitutional-Indian Contract Act, 1872 S.23.

Constitution of India Article 14-LIC floating term insurance policy with low premia but restricting availability to select class of persons-Held, unreasonable arbitrary and violative of Article 14.

Constitution of India Article 21-Life Insurance policy-Held, appropriate policy within the paying capacity of the insured is a social security measure to make right to life meaningful; Held further, while insurer free to evolve policy based on business principles, policy should be consistent with constitutional animation.

Constitution on India Article 226-Public law Writ petition challenging clause in term insurance policy of LIC-Held, action of LIC bears public character with an imprint of public interest element; writ maintainable Practice and procedure.

Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) introduced a term insurance policy under Table 58 for terms of 5, 6 and 7 years, with substantially low rates of premium intended to cater to a larger section of the population in the urban and rural areas. At the end of the term, in the event of survival the assured would not get anything. In the event of death, the nominee or the dependants would get the assured amount. However, LIC restricted this term policy only to "persons in government or quasi- government or in the service of reputed commercial firms". When LIC turned down proposals for term insurance cover from the executive trustee of the first respondent and certain others, they challenged, by way of writ petitions in the Gujarat High Court the conditions imposed under Table 58 as being arbitrary discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution. While upholding the eligibility and other criteria laid down under Table 58, the High Court declared unconstitutional and struck down that part of the conditions which restricted the term policy to a select class of persons. LIC as well as the writ petitioners appealed to this Court.

LIC contended that its policies were framed on actuarial considerations and that the High Court was not justified in interfering with matters based on economic criteria. The writ petitions seeking to enforce contractual obligations were not maintainable. The respondents contended that LIC had no power to impose any unconstitutional conditions in the con- tract; no classification much less a valid classification could be made of employees in government semi-government, organised sectors or reputed commercial organisations on the one hand and those self-employed or in unorganised sectors on the other.