<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from 11 states on a PIL questioning the legal validity of Aadhaar card under the Centre’s Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) project, as well as their decision to link it with certain benefits and services.<br /><br /></p>.<p>A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and S A Bobde wanted to know the modalities as to how the states had linked the services to Aadhaar cards.<br /><br />Earlier in September, the bench had passed an interim order barring all authorities from denying a benefit or service to any citizen for want of the Aadhaar card.<br /><br />It had also directed that no illegal immigrant should be issued Aadhaar while observing that the card may be linked with certain advantages meant for residents of the country.<br /><br />Subsequently, oil PSUs and the UIDAI approached the court seeking modification of the interim order. Senior counsel Shyam Divan, appearing for petitioner Justice K S Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court, challenged the constitutional validity of the scheme saying that the collection of personal data by different agencies on behalf of the government violated the fundamental right to privacy.<br /><br />He also said no consent was taken from an applicant before his fingerprints or other records are collected. The bench, however, said that collecting biometric information as a condition precedent for the issuance of the Aadhaar card would not impact all sections of the society, but only a particular section.<br /><br />The hearing is to resume on December 10.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from 11 states on a PIL questioning the legal validity of Aadhaar card under the Centre’s Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) project, as well as their decision to link it with certain benefits and services.<br /><br /></p>.<p>A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and S A Bobde wanted to know the modalities as to how the states had linked the services to Aadhaar cards.<br /><br />Earlier in September, the bench had passed an interim order barring all authorities from denying a benefit or service to any citizen for want of the Aadhaar card.<br /><br />It had also directed that no illegal immigrant should be issued Aadhaar while observing that the card may be linked with certain advantages meant for residents of the country.<br /><br />Subsequently, oil PSUs and the UIDAI approached the court seeking modification of the interim order. Senior counsel Shyam Divan, appearing for petitioner Justice K S Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court, challenged the constitutional validity of the scheme saying that the collection of personal data by different agencies on behalf of the government violated the fundamental right to privacy.<br /><br />He also said no consent was taken from an applicant before his fingerprints or other records are collected. The bench, however, said that collecting biometric information as a condition precedent for the issuance of the Aadhaar card would not impact all sections of the society, but only a particular section.<br /><br />The hearing is to resume on December 10.</p>
