Sign Petition to Chief Justice of India
We the undersigned request Chief Justice of India to stop the Government of India to continue committing contempt of court by implementing Aadhaar in each and every way , that it is doing inspite of Supreme Court’s order in the matter. Aadhaar is cannot be made mandatory till the matter is finally decided by the apex court one way or the other We request you to urgently hear the pending Aadhaar PILS
Draft letter you can send to your MP to request they take up amending Aadhaar Rules which are in parliament (drafted by Saurabh Bhatt)
Subject: Mandatory Use of UID-Aadhaar in Violation of Orders of the Supreme Court and Lacunae
in Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016
We write to about the Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016 [hereinafter, Aadhaar
Regulations] that have currently been laid before each House of Parliament in pursuance of Section 55
of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016
(hereinafter the Aadhaar Act), and seek to draw your attention to the lack of substantive and procedural
safeguards against exclusion of citizens through the use of Aadhaar.
At the outset, we express our profound sense of alarm at the manner in which Aadhaar has been made
mandatory, in clear disregard of Orders of the Supreme Court, for access to various entitlements,
subsidies, services, legal compliance, etc. We are constrained to point out that the Supreme Court has
repeatedly emphasised that the Aadhaar number “is purely voluntary and it cannot be made mandatory
till the matter is finally decided by the Court one way or the other“. It must also be noted that the
Supreme Court has, through its order dated 14-09-2016, persisted with the prohibition on the
mandatory use of Aadhaar even after the passage of the Aadhaar Act. As such, insistence of mandatory
submission of Aadhaar Number for an ever-expanding list of services and activities constitutes an
unconscionable breach of the rule of law as well as contempt of the Supreme Court of India.
Even as such mandatory use of Aadhaar constitutes a violation of Supreme Court order, it also reinforces
the need for a robust, accessible, and accountable procedural mechanism for preventing misuse of
Aadhaar number and protecting citizens from denial of services due to linkage with Aadhaar. However,
the procedures envisaged by the Aadhaar Regulations fail to conform to elementary principle of fairness,
access and natural justices that have been recognized as integral part of Art. 14 of the Constitution. We
draw your attention to the following aspects in particular:
Deactivation without pre-decisional hearing
Regulations 29 to 32 of the Aadhaar Regulations provide for deactivation of Aadhaar number. In view
of the linkage between Aadhaar number and basic services, including basic services recognised as part
of the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution, strict procedures with rigorous safeguard
constitute an imperative. Yet, Regulation 29 fails to provide for pre-decisional hearing to the number-
holder as a compulsory requirement. The Regulation uses the phrase “deactivation may require field
inquiry”, suggesting that UIDAI has the discretion to dispense with an inquiry.
Further, clause (2) of the Regulation suggests that UIDAI may ask another agency to carry out the inquiry
and submit a report. The regulation however makes no mention of the selection process of this agency,
the qualifications of the persons carrying out such inquiry or the procedure the agency must follow.
Another cause of concern is that clause (3) of Regulation also fails to provide any guidance on the
officers within the UIDAI that would be authorised to carry out such deactivation or what procedure
they would follow prior to deactivating the Aadhaar number.
Inadequacy of Grievance Redressal
Regulation 30 of the Aadhaar Regulations require an aggrieved number-holder to pursue a complaint
through the “grievance redressal mechanism” set up under Regulation 32. Regulation 32 states that the
UIDAI “shall set up a contact centre to act as a central point of contact for resolution of queries and
grievances of residents, accessible to residents through toll free number(s) and/ or e-mail.”
However, the Regulations contain no indication about the powers of the contact centre or the
procedures it shall follow. In view of the critical impact of any deactivation of Aadhaar number and
consequent denial of services, grievance redressal mechanism must be prompt, effective and accessible.
But in the absence of both substantive and procedural norms, the mechanism envisaged under
Regulation 32 is in danger of being nothing more than a charade.
Further, the mechanism also fails the principle of access given its reliance on phones and emails. Such
a mechanism would serve to exclude those without phones or internets who even at this moment,
constitute a sizable section of our citizenry. Admittedly, clause (3) of Regulation 32 allows residents to
“raise grievances by visiting the regional offices of the Authority or through any other officers or
channels as may be specified by the Authority.” But with regional offices currently existing in mere 8
states, this option may also prove to be an illusory rope.
Levying and collecting Fees
The Aadhar (Enrolment and Update) (First Amendment) Regulations 2017 have authorised Registrars,
Enrolling Agencies and other Service Providers to collect a fee from the residents for the services
provided by them. Imposition of fees would constitute a dual burden on citizens and residents. Not only
are people being compelled to sign up for Aadhaar, they shall also be charged a fee for such enrolment.
Indeed, it seems a cruel joke being played at the cost of people of India.
In view of these lacunae, we believe that Aadhaar Regulations fail to act as a strong bulwark against
exclusion of people due to linkage of Aadhaar and other services. Therefore, we write to you and call
upon you to exercise your responsibility as Members of Parliament and request you to endeavour to
modify or annul the Aadhaar Regulations under Section 55 of the Aadhaar Act before the Regulations
Serve contempt notice if forced to give aadhaar (drafted by Anupam Saraph)
DO MENTION IN COMMENTS IF YOU HAVE ACTED ON NAY OF THE ABOVE ACTIONS
April 3, 2017 at 9:44 pm
Time has come for Supreme Court to play a proactive role to safeguard constitution in the interest of people of the nation. It should uphold the voice of people against suppression of fundamental rights of expression and right to privacy
April 21, 2017 at 7:31 pm
Our opposition parliamentarians should more proactive in this matter of public interest
December 13, 2017 at 6:19 pm
मैं किसी भी कीमत पर आधार कार्ड नहीं बनवाने वाला।