He is arguing how it is not ultra vires the PMLA Act.
Sikri J interjects saying Rule 9 (4) is challenged on proportionality where there are several other officially valid documents.
DYC J interjects and asks TM to respond to contentions of Mr. Datar.
1. That the Rules are just subordinate legislation and that it is ultra vires Act.
2. There is no provision under PMLA to render a validly opened account inoperational.
SD also says it is also a question of one time verification v continuous verification.
DYC J says the overall purpose is clear but that we are into the nitty gritty legalities.
TM says may be there are no notifications.
Shyam Divan points out that it is defined under 2 (sa).
TM now defends that (!) saying these are about prize schemes etc.
TM says it is absolutely required. Public interest. Interest of the Nation. (It is not a FR violation by govt but FR violation for the nation!)
TM repeats the "national interest" argument.
TM wants to first address the question of accounts being non operational...it says it is only temporarily non operational till aadhaar is given.
Sikri J says when someone cannot withdraw his property, it is a 300A deprivation.
Sikri j earlier also asked about what about a pensioner who has been known to be a pensioner..
CJI and Sikri J but that cannot apply to Rules outside of Rule making power.
CJI says conditions, limitations, consequences are all different under law.
Sikri J refers to existing accounts and how you can freeze those accounts under the Act...even those validly opened accounts.