The larger bench will decide whether Aadhaar number can be used for schemes other than PDS & LPG as sought by various authorities and regulators like RBI, SEBI, TRAI, IRDA, PFRDA and others
In a setback to the central government, the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to modify its 11th August order restricting the use of Aadhaar card for distribution of food grain under PDS, supply of kerosene oil and LPG.
The apex court bench of Justice J Chelameswar, Justice SA Bobde and Justice C Nagappan while declining, for now, referred a batch of petitions seeking clarification/modification of the 11 August 2015 order to the larger bench, saying that the main matter has been referred to the larger bench so the application seeking relaxation of the order too should be referred to it.
The main matter relates to challenge to the validity of the Aadhaar scheme on the grounds that biometric data and iris scan collected under it violated the fundamental right to privacy of the citizens.
The Court also directed the Registry to put all the applications seeking clarification or modification before Chief Justice HL Dattu for appropriate order.
Seeking clarification on usage of Aadhaar number, regulators like Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority and Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) as well as state-run insurer Life Insurance Corp of India (LIC) had reached the Supreme Court. These regulators and LIC along with Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had asked for clarification on the apex court's order notwithstanding the fact that the SC had for the fourth time on 11 August 2015, had reiterated that Aadhaar cannot be a condition for obtaining any benefits otherwise due to citizens.
Markets regulator SEBI, in its application, has urged the court to modify its order to permit it to use Aadhaar number in the securities market for the confirmation of address of the brokers and intermediaries under the know-your-customer (KYC) scheme.
Similarly, the RBI has sought the modification of the order saying that if customers voluntarily share their Aadhaar number, then they may be permitted to do so for the purpose of banking transactions.
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in its application too has urged the Court to permit it to issue Aadhaar number to the people who are voluntarily approaching it for the same.
The three-judge Bench, while issuing directions on 11 August 2015, had referred all the petitions before it to a larger bench to determine whether right to privacy was a fundamental right.
The Court's 11th August order referring the matter to a larger bench had come on a batch of petitions including by Karnataka High Court's former judge KS Puttaswamy and Pune-based Nagarik Chetana Manch represented by senior counsel Shyam Divan, who have contended that the biometric details being collected for the issuance of Aadhaar violated the fundamental right to privacy of the citizens as personal data was not protected and was vulnerable to exposure and misuse.
This position was disputed by the central government, which had contended that the right to privacy was not a fundamental right as it referred to 1954 verdict by the bench eight judges and 1964 verdict by six judges bench which had both held this position. But the smaller benches of two or three judges took a contrary position, which the central government had contended was in breach of judicial discipline where smaller benches had to abide by the verdict of larger benches.
In the wake of the conflicting judgments, the bench of Justice Chelameswar, Justice Bobde and Justice Nagappan by their 11th August order had referred, to a larger bench, an authoritative decision on the status of right to privacy.
