SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20361

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MRS. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J
VANAJA KARAYI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7642 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.ANNA PAUL, SHRI.SHREEHARI K.K.
For the Respondents: SRI. ROHITH R KARTHA -CGC, SRI. K S PRENJITH KUMAR -SC, SRI. SHAMEER P M -GP

The regulation on age limits for Assisted Reproductive Technology services is constitutionally valid under public health considerations.

Headnote:The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 imposes an upper age limit for accessing ART services. The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Section 21(g) based on their age. The court found no grounds for relief, dismissing the petition following precedent in Pushpa K & Anr. v. The Union of India. The primary issue was framed as the right to ART services in context of age limits. The court reasoned that such regulatory provisions are valid, given public health considerations. The writ petition is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. challenge to age limit for art services. (Para 1)
2. precedent indicates no entitlement to relief. (Para 2)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners, who are wife and husband, having crossed the upper age limit of 50 years for women prescribed under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 (for short, “the Act”). The Act prohibits the application of the Assisted Reproductive Technology services (ART services) to persons above the prescribed age limit. Challenging the constitutional validity of Section 21 (g) of the Act to the extent it prescribes a maximum age for men and women to seek ART services from licensed clinics and also seeking a direction to the respondents to take immediate steps to provide ART services to the petitioners, they have approached this Court with the above writ petition.

2. A similar issue had come up before this court in Pushpa K & anr. Vs The Union of India & Ors. [W.P(C)

No.352 of 2013 and connected cases] and this court by common judgment dated 31.01.2026 has dismissed the writ petitions. Following the judgment in Pushpa K.(supra), I find that the petitioners are not entitled to get any relief as claimed and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top