The Supreme Court has ordered the government not to withhold any social benefits from those who are yet to get the Aadhar card and not to issue the unique identification card to illegal immigrants.
"No benefit of service shall be denied on account of non-possession of Aadhar, and no illegal immigrants would be issued Aadhar," a Supreme Court bench said in an interim order on Monday while dealing with a public interest litigation that challenged the scheme's constitutional validity and the indiscriminate manner in which the government was issuing the card.
The Aadhar or UID scheme, steered by former Infosys Technologies co-chairman Nandan Nilekani, was seen as the first step towards weeding out those undeserving of subsidies.
Some states such as Delhi had even attempted to make it mandatory for availing subsidies.
But a SC bench, comprising Justices BS Chauhan and SA Bobde, has thwarted any such attempt when it directed all states and union territories not to link subsidies and social welfare benefits to the possession of Aadhar cards.
The central government, through Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran and Additional Solicitor General L Nageshwar Rao, said the Aadhar was purely voluntary and denied all the charges raised in the PIL filed by retired Karnataka High Court judge KS Puttaswamy.
The petition claimed that different governments have linked social benefits to Aadhar which resulted in many people being denied these benefits. It cited several examples such as Maharashtra paying salaries to teachers only into Aadhar card-linked bank accounts and such cards being made mandatory in Jhakhand for registration of marriages.
"The linkage of Aadhar numbers with various government benefits and services, such as food security, LPG, Provident Fund etc makes enrolment and obtaining of such cards mandatory, falsifying government claims that they were voluntary," it said.
Represented by senior lawyer Anil Divan, the petition also claimed that Aadhar cards are being issued indiscriminately to all, including illegal immigrants, posing a huge security risk to the country.
It claimed that a law brought in to implement it had been rejected by a parliamentary standing committee on finance. Hence, the scheme lacked any legislative backing.
The whole process was rushed through vide an executive order for political ends, the petition alleged.
The PIL also claimed that the UID was in violation of Article 21, right to life guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, as it was against a person's right to privacy. The process of getting Aadhar entails biometrics such as finger printing and iris recognition. Courts in the US and UK have held collection and retention of such biometric data to be violation of an individual's right to privacy, it said.
Source : Economic Times
"No benefit of service shall be denied on account of non-possession of Aadhar, and no illegal immigrants would be issued Aadhar," a Supreme Court bench said in an interim order on Monday while dealing with a public interest litigation that challenged the scheme's constitutional validity and the indiscriminate manner in which the government was issuing the card.
The Aadhar or UID scheme, steered by former Infosys Technologies co-chairman Nandan Nilekani, was seen as the first step towards weeding out those undeserving of subsidies.
Some states such as Delhi had even attempted to make it mandatory for availing subsidies.
But a SC bench, comprising Justices BS Chauhan and SA Bobde, has thwarted any such attempt when it directed all states and union territories not to link subsidies and social welfare benefits to the possession of Aadhar cards.
The central government, through Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran and Additional Solicitor General L Nageshwar Rao, said the Aadhar was purely voluntary and denied all the charges raised in the PIL filed by retired Karnataka High Court judge KS Puttaswamy.
The petition claimed that different governments have linked social benefits to Aadhar which resulted in many people being denied these benefits. It cited several examples such as Maharashtra paying salaries to teachers only into Aadhar card-linked bank accounts and such cards being made mandatory in Jhakhand for registration of marriages.
"The linkage of Aadhar numbers with various government benefits and services, such as food security, LPG, Provident Fund etc makes enrolment and obtaining of such cards mandatory, falsifying government claims that they were voluntary," it said.
Represented by senior lawyer Anil Divan, the petition also claimed that Aadhar cards are being issued indiscriminately to all, including illegal immigrants, posing a huge security risk to the country.
It claimed that a law brought in to implement it had been rejected by a parliamentary standing committee on finance. Hence, the scheme lacked any legislative backing.
The whole process was rushed through vide an executive order for political ends, the petition alleged.
The PIL also claimed that the UID was in violation of Article 21, right to life guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, as it was against a person's right to privacy. The process of getting Aadhar entails biometrics such as finger printing and iris recognition. Courts in the US and UK have held collection and retention of such biometric data to be violation of an individual's right to privacy, it said.
Source : Economic Times
