Aadhar cards
Seshagiri Viswanatha Rao
(Querist) 26 February 2013
This query is : Resolved
Good Morning Experts
The Bill on the National Identity Authority of India Bill in 2010 to make the UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India a statutory body introduced by the Union Government has already been rejected by the Standing Committee of Parliament, kindly indicate whether it is legally valid for its enrollment by the citizens which is through executive orders in the absence of Parliament's approval
Regards
Khaleel Ahmed Mohammed
(Expert) 26 February 2013
It is valid even though it is executive order.If any body aggrrieved by this executive order may approach to the High Court through writ petition.
Seshagiri Viswanatha Rao
(Querist) 26 February 2013
This has been challenged in various courts including Supreme Court of India and its still pending in the courts
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 02 March 2013
Until this is set aside by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, it is valid.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 02 March 2013
agree with experts
SUBRAMANIAN C R
(Expert) 10 March 2013
This is real invasion of privacy. See the Data Sharing policy and Open Government platform.
Under the relevant provisions of Aadhar and UID, the date can be shared under orders of competent court. But competent court is not defined. An officer of the rank of Joint Secretary can decide whether to divulge or not. Thus collecting biometric data and sharing without consent of party is illegal. Moreover most of the companies doing the work have overseas limbs and they will be forced to divulge data.
Government saying that Aadhar is not compulsory but making it applicable to various schemes is illegal. WP(C) 494 of 2012 is pending in Hon'ble Apex Court. Till its disposal, such proceedings by Governments are not in good spirit.
Why should an Indian Citizen give biometric data to Government when it can be shared by the Government without his consent..
When I sent an email to Open Government Platform seeking clarification regarding sharing of biometric data collected by state, I got an evasive reply.
Subramanian
