PC says that if the procedure is illegal and unconstitutional, it will be open to scrutiny in the court of law.
Then reads section 57.
PC: Question should be is there any provision in the Act which doesn't fall under Ar. 110 (a) to (g). Because money bill can't have any provision beyond (a) to (g).
DYC J: Does the entirety of the bill has to go or the portions can be severed-those provisions which fall under Art. 110.
PC: It will go in entirety. The provisions are not severable.
Money bill is an extremely narrow subset of financial bill.
This bill goes far beyond the intended purpose of delivery of subsidies.
Collection, storage and use of data which invades privacy, Validity of Section 59, and exclusionary aspect of Section 7.
DYC J: Says that what section 59 does is that whatever has been done between 2009 to 2016 should be deemed to have been done in 2016 after the passage of this Act. Thus, it doesn't give retrospective validity to the acts.
KKV asks if that could've been done
Further asks the court to consider extension of deadlines.
Datar reads the order of 15th December.
CJI says that the deadline had been extended covering all the fields.