A Constitution Bench should dispose of all matters arising out of the Aadhaar issue once and for all, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court observed on Friday. It can be the Chief Justice of India JS Khehar's prerogative whether the matter would be heard by a Constitution Bench comprising five judges or more, Justice Jasti Chelameshwar observed.
The observation was made when the Aadhaar issue came up for hearing in front of the full bench in pursuance of a June 27 order delivered by a vacation bench. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, representing the petitioners, and Attorney General KK Venugopal agreed to the court's suggestion and agreed to jointly mention the matter before the Chief Justice of India next week.
"My opinion is that once a matter has been referred to a Constitution Bench, then all the issues arising out of it should be with the Constitution Bench. I can only say that a matter can be disposed of by a nine-judge bench. You two can decide the possibility of nine judges hearing it," said Justice Chelameswar heading the three-judge bench, also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Navin Sinha.
During the brief hearing, Divan recapped the orders delivered, starting from a 2015 October order which referred the Aadhaar matter to a Constitution Bench. During his submissions, Divan said the slew of notifications released by the Centre making Aadhar mandatory — a clear departure from the statute under which it is voluntary — was akin to making India a concentration camp.
The AG, however, took exception to this submission and observed that if Divan continued along the lines of this argument, he was not keen to pursue the matter further. "How can he (Divan) say India is like a concentration camp?" Venugopal observed.
However, responding to this, Divan said he stood by his submissions and reiterated that according to him, the provisions of Aadhar where one was required to give their biometrics was violative of his rights. "The current situation harks back to 1984 (George Orwell's book) and all other novels that speak of a totalitarian state," Divan said.
School children — minors who have not yet grasped the concept of choice — are being made to register their attendance via thumbprints, Divan said.
To this, Justice Chelameshwar agreed that thought the statement was bold, it was Divan's right to make his submissions as long as it was in a parliamentary language.
Various petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhar are pending before the apex court. However, it has been almost two years and the apex court has not yet constituted a bench to hear the matter despite several appeals.
ORWELLIAN PROBLEM?
- While arguing for the petitioners, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan said, “The current situation harks back to 1984 (George Orwell’s book) and all other novels that speak of a totalitarian state.”
