The Narendra Modi government on Tuesday came up with a stout defence of the Aadhaar scheme, launched by the previous UPA regime, and told the Supreme Court that it was not possible to roll it back and there was no illegality about the functioning of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told a bench of Justices J Chelameswar, S A Bobde and C Nagappan that the government had gone the "whole hog" in implementing the scheme under which around 70 per cent of the population had been covered so far at a cost of Rs 5000 crore.
"There is no real point in turning back. We have gone all the way in implementing the scheme. We have covered 80 crore people out of 120 crore population under the scheme," Rohatgi told the bench.
The Congress-led UPA government had in 2009 launched the programme to eliminate leaks in subsidies and other social benefits. The Centre and many states had subsequently made Aadhaar number mandatory for getting benefits under various social welfare schemes. The apex court had in an interim order, however, restrained the governments from making it mandatory and directed that no citizen be denied any benefits for want of Aadhaar.
Opposing a batch of petitions filed by social activists challenging the Constitutional validity of the scheme, the Attorney General said there was nothing unconstitutional about the programme and pleaded that the issue be decided by a Constitution bench.
"Considering the importance of issues involved in the case a bench of five judges should hear the matter," he said. The bench said it would consider the government's request on Wednesday.
At the outset, the bench expressed concern that in violation of its order, government authorities had made Aadhaar mandatory for some schemes and asked the Attorney General to look into the issue.
The court is examining about a dozen public interest petitions challenging the legal validity of Aadhaar on the grounds that it lacks sanction of law. The petitioners contended that the scheme violates citizens' right to privacy and cannot be implemented just by an administrative order. They said information collected under the programme can be acquired by other entities and misused.
"Our democratic Constitution does not permit such state surveillance. UID is the first step towards profiling and tracking citizens," senior advocate Shyam Diwan, appearing for the petitioners, told the court.
He opposed the Centre's plea to refer the matter to a larger bench saying that interpretation of the Constitution is not involved in the case and matter can be adjudicated by the three-judge bench
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told a bench of Justices J Chelameswar, S A Bobde and C Nagappan that the government had gone the "whole hog" in implementing the scheme under which around 70 per cent of the population had been covered so far at a cost of Rs 5000 crore.
"There is no real point in turning back. We have gone all the way in implementing the scheme. We have covered 80 crore people out of 120 crore population under the scheme," Rohatgi told the bench.
The Congress-led UPA government had in 2009 launched the programme to eliminate leaks in subsidies and other social benefits. The Centre and many states had subsequently made Aadhaar number mandatory for getting benefits under various social welfare schemes. The apex court had in an interim order, however, restrained the governments from making it mandatory and directed that no citizen be denied any benefits for want of Aadhaar.
Opposing a batch of petitions filed by social activists challenging the Constitutional validity of the scheme, the Attorney General said there was nothing unconstitutional about the programme and pleaded that the issue be decided by a Constitution bench.
"Considering the importance of issues involved in the case a bench of five judges should hear the matter," he said. The bench said it would consider the government's request on Wednesday.
At the outset, the bench expressed concern that in violation of its order, government authorities had made Aadhaar mandatory for some schemes and asked the Attorney General to look into the issue.
The court is examining about a dozen public interest petitions challenging the legal validity of Aadhaar on the grounds that it lacks sanction of law. The petitioners contended that the scheme violates citizens' right to privacy and cannot be implemented just by an administrative order. They said information collected under the programme can be acquired by other entities and misused.
"Our democratic Constitution does not permit such state surveillance. UID is the first step towards profiling and tracking citizens," senior advocate Shyam Diwan, appearing for the petitioners, told the court.
He opposed the Centre's plea to refer the matter to a larger bench saying that interpretation of the Constitution is not involved in the case and matter can be adjudicated by the three-judge bench
No comments:
Post a Comment