A five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar, by a majority of 4:1, rejected the review pleas.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a batch of review petitions challenging the 2018 judgment upholding the Constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Act. A five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar rejected the review pleas by a majority of 4:1. The bench stated that there was no case for a review of the 2018 judgement.
The order was passed on January 11 by a bench of AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, S Abdul Nazeer and BR Gavai with Justice Chandrachud expressing a dissenting opinion. Justice D Y Chandrachud dissented with the majority verdict and said that the review petitions be kept pending until a larger bench decides the question related to certification of a bill as a money bill. The Aadhaar Bill was certified as a money bill which enabled the government to get it cleared without getting the assent of a majority in Rajya Sabha.
The present review petitions were filed against the final judgment and order dated September 26, 2018. “We have perused the review petitions as well as the grounds in support thereof. In our opinion, no case for review of judgment and order dated September 26, 2018 is made out,” stated the majority order of January 11, reported LiveLaw.
“We hasten to add that change in the law or subsequent decision/judgment of a coordinate or larger bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review. The review petitions are accordingly dismissed, said the bench.
In 2018, the Supreme Court had upheld the validity of the Aadhaar by a 4:1 majority. The apex court read down one section of the act and struck down some other sections. While upholding its constitutional validity, the 2018 judgement delivered on a clutch of 27 petitions stated that Aadhaar did not violate the privacy of individuals, collected minimal data and deployed sufficient defense mechanisms.
Justice Chandrachud, in a separate dissenting opinion, agreed with some arguments made by the petitioners and stated that the Speaker was wrong to classify Aadhar Bill as a Money Bill. He stated that it denuded the federal structure of lawmakers and limited the role of the Rajya Sabha in the Aadhaar Bill. In addition, he raised concerns about violation of the right to privacy and risks of surveillance.
The order was passed on January 11 by a bench of AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, S Abdul Nazeer and BR Gavai with Justice Chandrachud expressing a dissenting opinion. Justice D Y Chandrachud dissented with the majority verdict and said that the review petitions be kept pending until a larger bench decides the question related to certification of a bill as a money bill. The Aadhaar Bill was certified as a money bill which enabled the government to get it cleared without getting the assent of a majority in Rajya Sabha.
The present review petitions were filed against the final judgment and order dated September 26, 2018. “We have perused the review petitions as well as the grounds in support thereof. In our opinion, no case for review of judgment and order dated September 26, 2018 is made out,” stated the majority order of January 11, reported LiveLaw.
“We hasten to add that change in the law or subsequent decision/judgment of a coordinate or larger bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review. The review petitions are accordingly dismissed, said the bench.
In 2018, the Supreme Court had upheld the validity of the Aadhaar by a 4:1 majority. The apex court read down one section of the act and struck down some other sections. While upholding its constitutional validity, the 2018 judgement delivered on a clutch of 27 petitions stated that Aadhaar did not violate the privacy of individuals, collected minimal data and deployed sufficient defense mechanisms.
Justice Chandrachud, in a separate dissenting opinion, agreed with some arguments made by the petitioners and stated that the Speaker was wrong to classify Aadhar Bill as a Money Bill. He stated that it denuded the federal structure of lawmakers and limited the role of the Rajya Sabha in the Aadhaar Bill. In addition, he raised concerns about violation of the right to privacy and risks of surveillance.
Source: TheNewsMinute.com