Assuming the notification was an act of parliament, even then it would've been ultra vires for collecting something as intrusive as biometrics. Also there was no informed consent and penalties that time.
Aadhaar schemes under section 7 should not involve children, merit education.
Exclude schemes for rehabilitation and involve stigma like bonded labourers, exclude food and nutrition, matters related to health.
J. Sikri: the problem is that wrong beneficiaries receive such benefits.
Section 7 beneficiaries are demoted to the status of second class citizens.
Aadhaar authentication is a violation of personal autonomy
1. Wisdom of the Rajya Sabha
2. Article 111
There are a lot of lawyers who are doing this pro Bono because they believe this is a huge constitutional matter. There's no commercial interest.
Footprints of ones activities are known by the State. Is there any nexus between such knowledge of the State and delivery of services?
A person can ping the authentication machine three times and get rejected and then get accepted on the fourth ping. How can we subject citizens to this?
What exactly is the compelling state interest that has been demonstrated?
Aadhaar's preponderant nature is: likely to invade.
Aadhaar alters the symbiotic nature between state and citizen.
However noble your intentions maybe, if you step out of the boundaries of the Constitution, then there's no saving such legislation.