#Aadhaar interim hearing thread.
Shyam Divan senior advocate commences arguments for petitioners.
SD quoting the earlier orders starting from 23.09.2013 after reading the 03.Nov.2017 orders noting that there would be a final hearing at the end of Nov.
SD: Now reading 24.03.2014 in the UIDAI v CBI case where SC directed all authorities to modify their forms and circulars to indicate that aadhaar is not mandatory.
SD: Now rearing 16.03.2015 order that reiterated the earlier two orders.
SD: Now reading 11.08.2015 order that limited even voluntary use of aadhaar to only 2 schemes. PDS and LPG. Also reads the part that referred the right to privacy question to a larger bench.
SD: Emphasises the part in 11.08.2015 order that aadhaar can only be on a consensual basis till the time the matters are finally heard and decided.
SD: Now gives the context for the 15.10.2015 order as to how UoI sought a variation of the 11.08.2015 order. Reads out the Constitution Bench order of 15.10.2015. Reads the part that added four more schemes to permitted use of Aadhaar.
SD: Emphasises the voluntariness part and how it clearly said it can be only voluntary till the matters are finally heard and decided. And even voluntary use limited for the six schemes.
Justice Sikri asks SD about the Justice Khehar order. (Possibly referring to Lokniti order for Phone linking)
SD says he will come to it. And also deal with the Binoy Viswam findings that there can be no injunction on parliament. But distjnguishes this case from 139AA where all notifications are delegated legislation.
SD then reads the Justice Gopala Gowda order of 14.09.2016 reiterating the 15.10.2015 order.
SD says that these orders hold the field and no variation of these orders have been effected.
SD says he wants to read 3 or 4 paras of the 9-judge privacy judgment.
SD reads para 180 of DYC opinion in the 9-judge bench.
SD emphasises how every infringment of privacy if at all has to be backed by law.
SD reads CBSE and NEET notifications and how they are not backed by law. And how for CBSE even children are asked to enrol before even the age of consent.
SD says it is a citizens rights problem...also an institution problem for this SC when its orders are completely discarded without an application for variation when the UoI is still before the Court in pending litigation.
UIDAI ceo is seen right behind A-G and is constantly whispering in A-G's ears.
SD now reads UGC circular on 26.06.2016 making aadhaar mandatory for scholarship. Also refers to nursery admission circulars. Emphasises how aadhaar requirement has no legal backing and has no nexus with the benefit.
A-G stands up and asks the bench as to where these notifications are in the pleadings and says he cannot defend the UGC or the UP Board.
SD says we have pleadings for each of these. We have a mountains of pleadings.
SD hands over the IA which was filed long long ago ...
A-G says notice has not been issued in any of the IAs!
CJI says we are not compelled to look at newspaper reports or website writings.
SD passionately says it is important for the Court to know that HIV patients being deprived of anti retroviral drug for want of aadhaar, it is a sad day if the Court refuses to take cognisance.
Rakesh Dwivedi says CBSE etc have not been made parties.
(The apparent churlishness of the A-G is off-putting to many lawyers on the petitioners' side)
CJI says the earlier orders where when Aadhaar was a scheme. Now it is an Act.
A-G agrees says aadhaar Act is now a complete code. CJI asks SD to not rely on rhetoric and hyperbole. SD seeks discarding all the rhetroic. Only on principle of law.
SD reads the list of 139 notifications and the absurdity of them all. DYC J says this is an argument on reasonableness. SD disagrees and says he wants to show how despite SC limiting to 6 schemes for a good reason,...
It is being expanded to all and sundry. Mid day meal for children?? Withholding of MDM for children?
Bench rises for lunch.
