10894 - PIL on Aadhaar for PDS foodgrains: HC seeks Centre's reply - Economic Times

PIL on Aadhaar for PDS foodgrains: HC seeks Centre's reply

By PTI | Updated: Mar 08, 2017, 07.31 PM IST

Under the NFSA, which was rolled out across the country in November last year, five kg of foodgrains per person is provided each month at Rs 1-3 per kg to over 80 crore people.

NEW DELHI: The government's decision to make Aadhaar mandatory for subsidised foodgrains through public distribution system (PDS) today came under the scanner of the Delhi High Court. 

A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal issued notice to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution and sought their response before the next date of hearing on April 24. 

The bench also sought the stand of the Delhi government on the plea which seeks disbursal of subsidised foodgrains to the beneficiaries under the National Food Security Act (NFSA), without asking for Aadhaar. 

The public interest litigation (PIL) has sought quashing of the Centre's February 8 notification, making it mandatory to have an Aadhaar card for availing benefits under NFSA, saying it violates the basic principle of law enshrined in Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. 

The Centre has given time to those people who do not have the biometric-based unique identification number to apply for Aadhaar by June 30. 

Aadhaar is a 12-digit unique identification number issued by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) after collecting biometric data of citizens. 

The notification came into effect from February 8 in all states and UTs, except Assam, Meghalaya and Jammu and Kashmir. 

Under the NFSA, which was rolled out across the country in November last year, five kg of foodgrains per person is provided each month at Rs 1-3 per kg to over 80 crore people. 

A social organisation -- Delhi Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan -- has moved the court seeking to enforce the fundamental right to food to the residents of Delhi, particularly the poor and vulnerable groups which are dependent on subsidised foodgrains distributed by the Delhi government through the PDS, which it claims is severely impaired by the notification. 

Challenging the constitutional vires of the Aadhaar/UID project, the plea said that due to the enforcement of the notification, people are being deprived of their rightful entitlement under the NFSA. 

It said the Supreme Court in an interim order in October 2015 had allowed voluntary use of Aadhaar and ruled that no citizen can be denied a service or subsidy for want of it. 

The plea further alleged that the Centre's decision to make Aadhaar mandatory for subsidised food goes against the Supreme Court's interim order and places the most vulnerable at the risk of being left out of the food security net.

10544 - ‘Aadhaar attendance’ row: 4 weeks’ time to Govt for response - Greater Kashmir

‘Aadhaar attendance’ row: 4 weeks’ time to Govt for response

A division bench of Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Tashi Rabstan asked the government to file the objections within four weeks. On October 14, the court had stayed the government order in this regard.

Srinagar, Publish Date: Oct 17 2016 11:35PM | Updated Date: Oct 17 2016 11:35PM

D A RASHID 

J&K High Court on Monday granted four weeks’ further time to the government to respond to a Public Interest Litigation challenging a government order that makes it mandatory for its employees to procure Aadhaar cards for biometric attendance in government offices. 

A division bench of Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Tashi Rabstan asked the government to file the objections within four weeks.  On October 14, the court had stayed the government order in this regard. 

Advocate General, Jahangir Iqbal Ganai today argued that in the government order the Aadhar based biometric attendance had been mentioned so that every Government employee could attend the office regularly and no proxy attendance was registered.

Through the PIL, advocate Syed Musaib has challenged GAD order (175/2006-Part file) whereby government on September 1 made procurement of Aadhaar card mandatory for government employees for Aadhaar-based Biometric Attendance in government offices. 

The government order, the petitioner pleaded, was in clear contravention of the constitutional bench order of the Supreme Court in Justice K.S Puttaswamy (Retd) & Anr versus Union of India, as well in violation of a three Judge Bench order of the apex court.

While on February 2, J&K government by an Order (35-F of 2016) had made Aadhaar mandatory for Government Employees, pensioners and other such people, High Court on August 3, 2016 quashed the Order. 

The Court had made it clear that it was beyond doubt that the government order issued could not sustain as it was in violation of the interim orders passed by the Supreme Court.  

9364 - PIL challenges Govt move to make Aadhaar mandatory - Greater Kashmir

PIL challenges Govt move to make Aadhaar mandatory

Citing the Supreme Court order that the government cannot deny service to anyone who does not possess Aadhaar as it is voluntary, the PIL seeks directions for making Aadhar non- compulsory for Salaries, Pensions, honorarium, LPG subsidies and other such beneficial entitlements.

D A RASHID 

Srinagar, Publish Date: Feb 13 2016 11:08PM | Updated Date: Feb 13 2016 11:08PM

File Photo

A Public Interest Litigation has been filed in Jammu and Kashmir High Court challenging the state government’s move making it mandatory for its citizens including employees to obtain Aadhaar card, in contravention of the Supreme Court ruling. 

Citing the Supreme Court order that the government cannot deny service to anyone who does not possess Aadhaar as it is voluntary, the PIL seeks directions for making Aadhar non- compulsory for Salaries, Pensions, honorarium, LPG subsidies and other such beneficial entitlements.

“The Government order no: 35-F of 2016, dated 10.02.2016 is directly in violation and contravention of the various direction issued by Supreme Court declaring that Aadhar is a voluntary Scheme and should not be made mandatory or compulsory, ” the petitioners plead. 

Petitioners Syed Musaib and Gulbaddin Ahmad Mir through the PIL seek to stay the government order whereby the state government has made it mandatory for all the government employees to get themselves registered for Aadhaar card or their salaries would be stopped from March this year.

On February 10, the Finance Department vide order number 35 of 2016, has made the Aadhaar based biometric system compulsory for employees of Jammu and Kashmir government.

“The State of Jammu & Kashmir has only 46.9% Aadhar enrollment, which is amongst the lowest number of Aadhar card holders in the entire country. Hence, such impugned government order is illogical and has been passed without any application of mind” the petitioners plead.

“Aadhar Scheme infringes the Right of Privacy and the same is subject matter of five Judge Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court. Such impugned government order undermines and prejudices the case in hand before the Supreme Court as well” they plead. 

“The impugned government order suffers from infirmity with respect to the Constitution of India as rest of the citizen of the country in all other parts are exempted from compulsory disclosure and in the state of Jammu & Kashmir people are forced to disclose private information under the cloak of Aadhar Scheme,” the PIL reads. 

“ There have been various media reports earlier as well at present, that depict harassment on part of various government department towards the innocent masses on account of Aadhar being mandatory,” the PIL states. 

Pointing out that Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), a central government agency was established on January 28, 2009 after the Planning Commission of India issued a notification, the petitioners plead that that UIDAI’s basic objective was to collect the biometric and demographic data of residents, store them in a centralized database, and issue a 12-digit unique identity number called Aadhar.

“The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance in December-2011, led by Yashwant Sinha, rejected the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 in its then present form and suggested modifications. It termed the project "unethical and volatile of Parliament's prerogatives", they plead.

The petitioners plead that in an interim order on a PIL against Adhar card, the apex court observed that the government cannot deny a service to anyone who does not possess Aadhaar, as it is voluntary.

“The Supreme Court had directed the government to widely publicize in print and electronic media that Aadhaar is not mandatory for any welfare scheme. The Court also referred the petitions claiming Aadhaar is unconstitutional and infringes right of privacy matter to a Constitutional Bench,” they said. 

The PIL will come up for hearing, if approved by Chief Justice of J&K High court.

7970 - Government gives thumbs up to Aadhaar card, but does not make it compulsory - dna

Government gives thumbs up to Aadhaar card, but does not make it compulsory

Saturday, 16 May 2015 - 7:20am IST | Place: New Delhi | Agency: dna | From the print edition

Prabhati Nayak Mishra

Narendra Modi government made it clear that UID scheme is "voluntary" and not mandatory. The apex court, which had restrained the authorities from making the Aadhaar card mandatory for extending benefits to public in September 2013, had asked the Narendra Modi government to apprise whether it would like to continue with the scheme.

Stepping into the shoes of UPA govt, the Centre on Friday told Supreme Court that it would continue with Unique Identification (UID) or Aadhaar card scheme for its multiple benefit to public.

Narendra Modi government made it clear that UID scheme is "voluntary" and not mandatory. The apex court, which had restrained the authorities from making the Aadhaar card mandatory for extending benefits to public in September 2013, had asked the Narendra Modi government to apprise whether it would like to continue with the scheme.

"There is a strong case for continuation of the UID scheme in view of the widespread use and the benefits being provided to the Aadhaar enrollees," the government said filing a joint affidavit including finance ministry, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and other authorities in response to the court's query on a PIL which challenged the validity of the Aadhaar card scheme.

"The enrollment to the UID scheme is purely on a voluntary basis and it is not mandatory upon any person to enroll with UID scheme and consequently part with their biometric information," the government added.

Opposing the PIL, which sought court to strike down the policy, government provided the data over the scheme saying, "As on March 31, 2015 a cumulative expenditure of Rs5,980.62 crore and over 1,000 crore on IT infrastructure has been incurred under the scheme."

"Over 80.46 crore Aadhaar numbers have been generated, 16.25 crore bank accounts have been linked to it enabling the public to get direct benefit transfer (DBT), over 37 crore LPG subsidy transfer transactions amounting to total of over Rs11,500 crore and a total of 61.04 lakh payment transactions have been done through DBT across the country for 34 schemes amounting to Rs681.14 crore," as stated in the affidavit while explaining the multiple benefits of the scheme.

It cited the example of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MNREGA), the government claimed that the UID scheme has helped it in streamlining the MGNREGA database.

Countering the allegations in the PIL, the authorities said the UID has both constitutional and legal basis, the government said introduction of the scheme falls within the realm of positive duties that must discharge by the state.

Even though Right to Privacy Bill is under consideration, it laid emphasis on right to privacy and data protection. Explaining that it said, "Robust measures are being adopted to safeguard the information related to Aadhaar and its usage. UID scheme ensures data security protection."

The court was hearing a PIL filed by Bangalore based resident Mathew Thomas alleging that collection of data was being carried out by certain foreign companies with alleged dubious credentials which would impinge one's privacy.

Questioning the locus of the petitioner, the government wanted the court to reject the plea and allow it to go ahead with the scheme.

7154 -

Forcing people to get Aadhaar card: A violation of Supreme Court order

Sankara Narayanan

04 January, 2015

When Aadhaar was unfolded with a lot of fanfare by UPA-II government, serious objections tumbled out from print and electronic media and several few experts pinpointing the grave risks to the citizens. By collecting and holding all the personal details, the state can easily put the individuals to ransom, if needed. We are regularly flooded with information how unscrupulous elements are playing havoc with our money in banks by way of knowing our account number or credit card details or ATM pin. Less we talk about our Income Tax returns exposed to mafia elements, the better.

All personal information about the citizens will also be available with the private companies involved in the UID scheme for a period of 7 years. There are very many outside companies. One such company was promoted by the notorious Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the USA.

In Focus

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Apex Court challenging the validity of Aadhaar on several grounds. Infringing the fundamental rights of a citizen and endangering the sovereignty of the nation were among several issues pointed out in the PIL. The petition was admitted by the Supreme Court and the matter is subjudice.

During the interregnum, oil marketing companies (OMCs) started insisting people to produce Aadhaar card to avail subsidy on cooking gas. Several other state agencies forced people to produce Aadhaar card to enjoy a few other facilities. This was brought to the notice of the Supreme Court by the petitioners.

The Supreme Court had scrapped the Aadhaar card in its interim order, saying that it was not mandatory to avail the card to get government subsidies. But people are still being asked to furnish the cards, once they are issued, to get subsidy on cooking gas  cylinders.

The Central govt had already spent Rs.8000 on this fancy scheme without the sanction of Parliament. While the validity is under challenge before the Apex Court, the state govts are going ahead with the scheme in breakneck speed. People are cajoled and threatened by the state in various fora to rush and enrol failing which they will be denied several benefits. 

Opening a bank account be possible only when a citizen produces Adhaar card is another threat. What will happen to all these efforts, harassment to the public and the money spent already/being spent now, if the court strikes down the UID scheme?

Documents provided by consumer activists show that consumers wanting to avail non-Aadhaar-based LPG subsidy transfer need to make a submission that they will furnish the Aadhaar card to the bank once it is issued to them. One of the testimonies needed to be submitted by the non-Aadhaar card holders to the bank as well as the LPG distributor goes like this: "I confirm that I do not have Aadhaar number as on date. As soon as I receive the Aadhaar number, I will link the same to my LPG consumer number by giving a copy of the same to my distributor and also will get it linked to my bank account."

If a consumer does not give the Aadhaar card despite having it, he will face punishment under the Indian Penal Code for giving false information. 

Justice K S Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the High Court of Karnataka, who had moved the Supreme Court against the Aadhaar card, termed these measures contrary to the BJP's national manifesto and the Supreme Court directions.

"The interim orders passed by the Supreme Court on a batch of petitions on Aadhaar card have virtually scrapped the Unique Identity (UID) scheme. Yet, the government is pushing for it. The BJP is stepping back from its poll promises," said Justice Puttaswamy. The Centre was trying to push for the project by bringing in the National Identity Authority Bill in parliament.

Officials promoting this scheme believe that diversion of subsidised LPG can be checked through the UID. It is a bogus claim. The subsidised cylinders can be diverted even after making Aadhaar mandatory.

The percentage of diversion is now at a minimum as the oil companies have understood the problem and have taken many corrective measures. The OMCs have realised that a 14.25-kg cylinder will be enough for a family of four for 21 days. So nobody can avail a refill cylinder before 21 days. Another important measure is the IVRS system whereby the oil companies have stopped the distributors from accepting the request for a refill cylinder.

The consumers can directly call the IVRS number and the request is forwarded to the distributor. Whenever a bill is raised, the consumer gets an SMS alert. Unless the consumer colludes, there is no possibility of diversion of subsidised cylinder. According to a few studies during the past four years, Aadhaar - which is expected to check the misuse of government schemes for poor people - is a fraud.

Aadhaar was linked to the LPG delivery system to achieve the registration target, on which already Rs 8,000 crore has been spent. When the Centre realised that they were failing in this scheme due to lack of interest among the people, particularly the middle class, they linked LPG subsidised cylinders to Aadhaar.

These contradictions were brought to the notice of the courts by some activists. In the lower court, they failed. But, when they learnt about a PIL in the Supreme Court, they intervened in the petition. They expanded the argument by bringing discrepancies to the notice of the Apex Court.

They also expressed serious reservations over the UID, saying that US-based L-1 Identity Solutions, where one retired CIA director - George Tenet - is on the roll, has been assigned the task to execute the program. If we are conscious citizens, should we not file a batch of contempt of court petitions against the Centre, State Govts, banks and OMCs over the violation of its order?

Editorial NOTE: This article is categorized under Opinion Section. The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of merinews.com. In case you have a opposing view, please click here to share the same in the comments section.

- See more at: http://www.merinews.com/article/forcing-people-to-get-aadhaar-card-a-violation-of-supreme-court-order/15903228.shtml#sthash.BhMRWgf1.dpuf

7053 - Notice Ordered to Petroleum Ministry on DBTL Mandate - New Indian Express

Notice Ordered to Petroleum Ministry on DBTL Mandate

By Express News Service

Published: 11th December 2014 05:52 AM

BPCL territory manager D Srinivasan displaying the DBTL forms translated into Tamil by TNIE as part of its Editorial Social Responsibility to end the language barrier, in Chennai on Wednesday | P RAVIKUMAR

MADURAI: The Madras High Court bench here has issued notices to the Union and State Governments on a petition challenging the Petroleum Ministry’s mandate to LPG consumers to submit details of their Aadhaar card and bank accounts to avail of subsidy under the DBTL Scheme.

The petitioner, S M Ananthamurugan, submitted that as per a latest survey more than 40 crore people owned gas connections in India of whom 50 per cent did not have bank accounts.

He contended that through the DBTL mandate the Union Government was forcing LPG consumers to open a bank account. Ideally subsidies must be provided before a product is purchased or at the time of delivery of the product. Under the DBTL, the subsidy would be credited into customers’ bank accounts after the cylinder is delivered.

This virtually means the oil companies are taking the full money for a cylinder from a customer and then returning a part. Citing that the SC had earlier directed the Centre not to insist on Aadhaar for doling out any welfare scheme, petitioner’s counsel argued that under the Direct Benefit Transfer of LPG Scheme LPG consumers with Aadhaar cards are being given first preference. This amounted to contempt of court.

According to him, if the Government wanted to eliminate bogus LPG consumers, they should have identified such consumers and weeded them out instead of introducing the DBTL Scheme.

Hence he sought an order of injunction restraining the Union Government from implementing the DBTL Scheme in its present form.

Hearing the plea, a bench comprising Justices V Dhanapalan and V M Velumani ordered notices to the Union Cabinet.

7052 - Aadhaar-based cash transfers: Madras HC notice stokes fear of judicial backlash - Business Standard

Aadhaar-based cash transfers: Madras HC notice stokes fear of judicial backlash

An earlier version of the scheme had to be stopped after SC observed Aadhaar numbers could not be made mandatory for availing of benefits

Sudheer Pal Singh  |  New Delhi  December 12, 2014 Last Updated at 00:45 IST

The fear of a judicial backlash against the government’s attempt to revive the Aadhaar-linked direct benefits transfer of LPG (DBTL) subsidy returned on Wednesday, with a division Bench of the Madras High Court issuing notices to the cabinet secretary, petroleum secretary and the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) chairman in this regard.

A public interest suit was filed in the Madurai bench of the court, challenging the central government’s move to link Aadhaar and bank account details with domestic gas cylinder connections, as part of the DBT scheme. The petitioner, Sivakasi-based advocate S M Anantha Murugan, called for restraining the scheme as the Supreme Court had earlier restrained oil companies from demanding Aadhaar card numbers for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) cylinders.

Business Standard had on October 28 reported that Solicitor-General Ranjit Kumar had advised against resuming cash transfers in cooking gas without taking the Supreme Court’s approval. The government should first place the report of a committee appointed to study the scheme before the court and seek a modification in its ruling, he had advised. A senior petroleum ministry official had recently said the ministry would approach the court if the need arose. An earlier version of the scheme was rolled out by the previous government in June last year which had to be stopped after the Supreme Court observed Aadhaar numbers could not be made mandatory for availing of benefits from the government. The scheme had already been rolled out in 292 districts by then and the government had transacted via Aadhaar about Rs 5,000 crore to beneficiaries.

A modified version of the DBT scheme was launched by the new government in 54 districts across 11 states, covering 23.3 million households, on November 15, to reduce diversion of subsidised domestic cooking gas. The new scheme does not make an Aadhaar number mandatory. Currently, the Aadhaar generation level in the 54 chosen districts stands at 95 per cent. Under the new scheme, consumers without Aadhaar numbers can receive cash directly in their bank accounts. However, they may have to shift to an Aadhaar-based cash transfer system when they get their Aadhaar numbers. Also, consumers not cash transfer-compliant (CTC) get a three-month grace period, during which they receive the cylinders at a subsidised rate.

To ensure LPG consumers have extra cash to pay for the first LPG cylinder at market price, a permanent advance is to be paid to them as soon as they make their first cylinder booking after joining the scheme.

5130 - DBTL: HC Seeks Reply on Aadhaar Linkage- New Indian xpress

DBTL: HC Seeks Reply on Aadhaar Linkage

By Express News Service - CUTTACK

Published: 31st January 2014 08:56 AM

Last Updated: 31st January 2014 08:56 AM

The Orissa High Court on Thursday sought reply from the Union Petroleum Ministry on the issue of insistence of oil companies for Aadhaar card linkage by consumers to avail the subsidy on LPG despite the orders of the Supreme Court.

Acting on two PILs filed by chairman of the All Odisha Consumers Protection Council KP Krishnan and one Ashok Paikray of Bhubaneswar, the division bench comprising Chief Justice AK Goel and Justice AK Ratha directed Assistant Solicitor General to submit information within a period of one week. The PILs would be taken up for hearing on February 10.

The petitioners drew attention of the Court towards public announcement made by the Union Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas through the oil companies that only those consumers who have linked Aadhaar cards to their bank accounts under the Direct Benefit Transfer for LPG (DBTL) scheme would be provided the subsidy from January 31. Those who do not have Aadhaar cards or have not linked it to their accounts will have to purchase cylinders at market price of ` 1,100 instead of the subsidised ` 425.

They alleged that the advertisements were in gross violation of the Supreme Court, which in an interim order on September 23, 2013, had issued clear directives that Aadhaar Card cannot be made mandatory for people availing any Government benefit including LPG subsidy.

The DBTL for LPG has been rolled out in four districts of Cuttack, Khurda, Puri and Balangir in the first phase since November last year. Consumers have been given the deadline of January 31 to ensure linkage of the bank accounts with the cards.

Making the DBTL linkage mandatory will pose huge problem for consumers as the State has not achieved significant success in enrolment.

As of December 10 last year, biometric enrolment of only 64.52 per cent of the population had been completed and more than 36.92 lakh of the 2.70 crore biometrics had been rejected by UIDAI.

The petitioners also pointed out that Aadhaar generation in Cuttack was only around 60 per cent, Balangir 62 per cent, Puri 67 per cent and Khurda 64 per cent.

Citing the apex court order and dismal performance in terms of Aadhaar registration in Odisha, the petitioners have prayed for directions to the Union Ministry and oil companies to desist from insisting on production of Aadhaar cards for obtaining subsidy. No citizen should be denied Government benefits for not having the card, they said.

4976 - Apex court questions Aadhaar validity - Deccan Herald

Apex court questions Aadhaar validity

New Delhi, Nov 26, 2013, DHNS:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from 11 states on a PIL questioning the legal validity of Aadhaar card under the Centre’s Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) project, as well as their decision to link it with certain benefits and services.

A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and S A Bobde wanted to know the modalities as to how the states had linked the services to Aadhaar cards.

Earlier in September, the bench had passed an interim order barring all authorities from denying a benefit or service to any citizen for want of the Aadhaar card.

It had also directed that no illegal immigrant should be issued Aadhaar while observing that the card may be linked with certain advantages meant for residents of the country.

Subsequently, oil PSUs and the UIDAI approached the court seeking modification of the interim order. Senior counsel Shyam Divan, appearing for petitioner Justice K S Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court, challenged the constitutional validity of the scheme saying that the collection of personal data by different agencies on behalf of the government violated the fundamental right to privacy.

He also said no consent was taken from an applicant before his fingerprints or other records are collected.  The bench, however, said that collecting biometric information as a condition precedent for the issuance of the Aadhaar card would not impact all sections of the society, but only a particular section.

The hearing  is to resume on December 10.

4399 - Kerala high court dismisses PIL on Aadhaar

Kerala high court dismisses PIL on Aadhaar

TNN Jun 29, 2013, 02.33AM IST

KOCHI: A public interest litigation challenging implementation of Unique Identification Number (Aadhaar) scheme without any constitutional or legal sanction was dismissed by the Kerala high court on Friday.

Dismissing the petition, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and Justice K Vinod Chandran asked the petitioner, 'Kozhikkodu Jilla Pauravakasa Samrakshana Samithi' secretary Asees Kakkadan, to approach the court as an individual petitioner if he is aggrieved by the scheme.

In the PIL filed through advocate V T K Mohanan, it was pointed out that National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010 was rejected by parliamentary standing committee in December 2011 citing lack of statutory backing. But the central government is going ahead with the project in a hurried manner to enable private agencies enrolling citizens to the scheme to make money, it was alleged.

The petitioner also contended that It was also argued that many state agencies are insisting for Aadhaar to avail of various government benefits. of various government programmes such as LPG subsidy, educational benefits, welfare pension, etc.

A citizen cannot be denied the benefits of government projects only for not registering under an authority. the petitioner had contended.

3438 - PIL challenges Aadhar card compulsion, govt on notice /Supreme Court notice to govt on PIL over Aadhar

PIL challenges Aadhar card compulsion, govt on notice

HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times  New Delhi, April 12, 2013

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked the Delhi government to reply to a plea seeking quashing of its executive orders to make Aadhar cards compulsory for the public to avail of various benefits and services.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher issued a notice to the Delhi government, seeking its view on a public interest litigation that termed the executive orders issued by the government of making the cards mandatory "illegal". Petitioner Ashutosh Chadola contended that the planning commission has said the cards were only optional and no one can be forced to get the card.

The petition sought a direction to the government to accept other identity and address proofs such as voter ID card, passport and other documents, prescribed by the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, for availing public services in Delhi.

"The entire (Aadhaar) project (of Planning Commission) is meant to be voluntary in nature and this is reflected in the Aadhar enrolment form that clearly mentions that the Aadhar enrolment is free and voluntary," it said.

The petition contended that the project was launched to empower the poor, who lack ID proofs, in accessing various welfare and other services.

The government, however, issued executive orders and made Aadhar mandatory for obtaining various certificates relating to "caste, domicile, income, death and birth."

Aadhar has also been made necessary for registration of various documents relating to property, will and marriages, the petition said.

It said the constitutional validity of UIDAI has been challenged in the Supreme Court and till the case is decided, "the burden of obtaining an Aadhar should not be made mandatory on the public for availing public services."

Supreme Court notice to govt on PIL over Aadhar

TNN Dec 1, 2012, 12.40AM IST

(The Supreme Court on Friday…)

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to examine the legal sanctity behind the much hyped Aadhaar cards being prepared by the Unique Identification Authority which will be the sole proof for the government's scheme for direct transfer of cash to a poor person's account.

A bench of Chief Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice J Chelameswar issued notice to the Centre on a PIL by a retired judge of Karnataka high court, K S Puttaswamy, who alleged that the government, by going ahead with distribution of UID numbers and cards to citizens, was bypassing Parliament which was still considering a bill on this issue.

The PIL said collection of personal data by the government not only violated the citizen's fundamental right to privacy but was also an executive act in overreach of Parliament, where National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010, was still pending for consideration.

Senior advocate Anil Divan questioned the grant of UID numbers and Aadhaar cards to illegal migrants at a time when the bill was pending before Parliament and its standing committee had rejected the bill in its report. The PIL requested the court to restrain the government from issuing UID numbers and Aadhaar cards till Parliament took a decision on the bill.

When the bench said Parliament could debate the standing committee's report and decide not to accept it, Divan said this could happen only through a informed debate on the floor of Parliament and the government could not have pre-empted the outcome of the debate through an executive action.

The petitioners, Justice Puttaswamy and another, said they had ascertained that the Unique Identification Number Project proposed to give UID numbers not only to citizens but also illegal migrants pursuant to a scheme framed by the government through an executive order of January 28, 2009.

Referring to several judgments of the Supreme Court on right to privacy of a citizen guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioners said, "Collecting biometric information as a condition precedent for the issue of Aadhaar card is an invasion of right to privacy of citizens and thereby this can only be done by a law enacted by Parliament and hence, beyond the executive power."

The petitioners asked, "Can executive power be used in a manner so as to make legislative power redundant or in other words, whether by the exercise of executive power, the executive can circumvent Parliament?"

2195 - PIL seeks to scrap Nandan Nilekani's Aadhar project - Economic Times

9 JAN, 2012, 11.20PM IST, PTI 

CHENNAI: Describing the process of preparing all-purpose Aadhar identity cards as illegal, a PIL filed in the Madras High Court has sought to scrap the project, saying personal and biometric details of citizens are being collected without the permission of Parliament. 

When the petition filed by S Raju of Vriddhachalam in Cuddalore district came up for admission today, the first bench comprising Chief Justice M Y Eqbal and Justice K B K Vasuki declined to stay functioning of the Unique Identity Authority of India (UIDAI) but issued notice to the Centre, Tamil Nadu government and UIDAI. 

When the petition was taken up, Raju's counsel N G R Prasad submitted that the UIDAI, constituted through an executive order, had no powers to compile personal details of people for Aadhar cards. Headed by co-chairman of Infosys Nandan Nilekani, UIDAI has so far spent Rs 673 crore between January 2009 and Nov 2011, while estimated cost for 2011-2012 would be Rs 1,500 crore. 

The counsel pointed out that when an attempt was recently made to introduce a Bill in Parliament, the Standing Committee on Finance discussed and rejected it on various grounds. "One of the main grounds raised by the committee is that the Aadhar project is a threat to national security and misuse of data of residents," he claimed. 

Without any statutory source for its existence, UIDAI has been entering into MoUs state governments, central government organisations and private entities to execute the project, it said, adding people are being asked to provide details like name, age, address, apart from scanned images of fingerprints and iris. 

"It is significant to state that in the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules 2003, there is no mention of collecting biometric data from the residents." 

Prasad noted that collection of such details without any permission from any statutory authority or Parliament is unconstitutional and that it amounted to serious infringement of the constitutional rights of citizens. 

Prasad expressed apprehensions over the Centre's claims that the details are being compiled for the purpose of security and getting welfare schemes and contended that the possibility of misuse of personal details was very high. "If the project is aimed at distributing welfare schemes, how come income and health related details are not excluded?" he asked. 

Noting that the Citizenship Rules 2003 talked only about "visible identification mark", the PIL said the card is being made mandatory for services like LPG supply and banks. Describing it as "surveillance profiling" and "compulsory extraction of movements" of citizens, the petition sought disbanding of the authority and putting its activities on hold with immediate effect. 

2193 - PIL seeks to scrap Aadhar project - IBN Live

PTI | 10:01 PM,Jan 09,2012

Chennai, Jan 9 (PTI) Describing the process of preparing all-purpose Aadhar identity cards as illegal, a PIL filed in the Madras High Court has sought to scrap the project, saying personal and biometric details of citizens are being collected without the permission of Parliament. When the petition filed by S Raju of Vriddhachalam in Cuddalore district came up for admission today, the first bench comprising Chief Justice M Y Eqbal and Justice K B K Vasuki declined to stay functioning of the Unique Identity Authority of India (UIDAI) but issued notice to the Centre, Tamil Nadu government and UIDAI. When the petition was taken up, Raju's counsel N G R Prasad submitted that the UIDAI, constituted through an executive order, had no powers to compile personal details of people for Aadhar cards. Headed by co-chairman of Infosys Nandan Nilekani, UIDAI has so far spent Rs 673 crore between January 2009 and Nov 2011, while estimated cost for 2011-2012 would be Rs 1,500 crore. The counsel pointed out that when an attempt was recently made to introduce a Bill in Parliament, the Standing Committee on Finance discussed and rejected it on various grounds. "One of the main grounds raised by the committee is that the Aadhar project is a threat to national security and misuse of data of residents," he claimed. Without any statutory source for its existence, UIDAI has been entering into MoUs state governments, central government organisations and private entities to execute the project, it said, adding people are being asked to provide details like name, age, address, apart from scanned images of fingerprints and iris. "It is significant to state that in the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules 2003, there is no mention of collecting biometric data from the residents." Prasad noted that collection of such details without any permission from any statutory authority or Parliament is unconstitutional and that it amounted to serious infringement of the constitutional rights of citizens.