Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Seeking Specified Ministry For Senior Citizens, Allows Petitioner To Approach Govt

The Supreme Court on January 20 refused to entertain a writ petition as withdrawn seeking direction for the Union Government to consider establishing a dedicated Ministry for senior citizens of the country. The Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the petition and make an appropriate representation to the concerned ministries of the Government.

The writ petition was heard by a bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra.

The petitioner was Advocate G Priyadharshi, a lawyer and social worker, who sought a special ministry in the Union Government for the senior citizens. The writ petition states: "It is most respectfully submitted that 'senior citizens' being a 'vulnerable class' in itself, comes under constitutional prism of Article 21 owing to the unique and myriad challenges they suffer such as health, societal structure, financial instability and dependence."

The writ petition refers to the recent date in 'India Ageing Report 2023: Caring for our elders: Institutional Responses' as per which 149 million persons are aged 60 years.

"By 2050, the share of older persons will double to 20.8 percent, with the absolute number at 347 million (34.7 crore). It is therefore imperative to have an exclusive Ministry/ Exclusive Department that can cater to the policies, schemes, financial assistance, health care requirements, pension, etc. This unprecedented rise in the ageing population, if not categorically handled by an exclusive Ministry/specific department, shall have detrimental implications in health, economy and in the societal structure at large," the writ petition states.

At the outset when Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan began arguing, Justice Narasimha interjected and stated that the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Justice Narasimha said: "You should read your writ. It cannot be done."

When Sankaranarayanan pressed that he would amend the plea and then come back to the Court, Justice Narasimha suggested otherwise. He stated that it is understandable had the petitioner come to the Court with a pray seeking specific directions against an ailment or a problem, but the Court cannot be asked to create a Ministry.

Justice Narasimha also questioned the nature of prayers in the writ petition. Nevertheless, the Court allowed Sankaranarayanan to briefly argue.

After brief arguments and before dismissing the plea, Justice Narasimha stated: "We heard that a Chief Minister of one of the States giving incentives for more children. It is a complete circle. Earlier, it was de-incentive for having more children in contesting Panchayat elections and all. Now, it is the other way round. Now, we need to relook and keep it par with younger generation."

Case Details: G PRIYADHARSHNI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.,W.P.(C) No. 21/2025

Appearances: Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Rahul Shyam Bhandari