New Delhi : The Supreme Court today did not seem to agree with the government's contention that the Aadhaar law was correctly termed as a Money Bill by the Lok Sabha Speaker as it dealt with "targeted delivery of subsidies" for which funds come from the Consolidated Fund of India.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Dipak Misra referred to Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act which says that "State or anybody corporate or person" can use Aadhaar number for establishing identity of an individual for any purpose.
"The problem arises with regard to section 57 (of the Aadhaar Act). Section 57 snapped the link with section 7 and the targeted delivery of subsidies, benefits and services," the bench, also comprising Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, said.
The remarks came when Attorney General K K Venugopal was advancing arguments in response to submissions of lawyers including senior advocate P Chidambaram that Aadhaar, by no standard, could have been certified as a Money Bill by Lok Sabha Speaker as it did not meet the conditions of Article 110 (definition of Money Bill) of the Constitution.
"The expenditure has to go into thousands of crores of rupees from the Consolidated Fund of India. This itself brings it (law) into the ambit of Money Bill under Article 110 of the Constitution," he said.
"Not a single provision in the Act is unnecessary or unrelated to the main purpose or the pith and substance of the Act which is giving subsidies, services and benefits," the top law officer said.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Dipak Misra referred to Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act which says that "State or anybody corporate or person" can use Aadhaar number for establishing identity of an individual for any purpose.
"The problem arises with regard to section 57 (of the Aadhaar Act). Section 57 snapped the link with section 7 and the targeted delivery of subsidies, benefits and services," the bench, also comprising Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, said.
The remarks came when Attorney General K K Venugopal was advancing arguments in response to submissions of lawyers including senior advocate P Chidambaram that Aadhaar, by no standard, could have been certified as a Money Bill by Lok Sabha Speaker as it did not meet the conditions of Article 110 (definition of Money Bill) of the Constitution.
Advertisement
"The expenditure has to go into thousands of crores of rupees from the Consolidated Fund of India. This itself brings it (law) into the ambit of Money Bill under Article 110 of the Constitution," he said.
Advertisement
"Not a single provision in the Act is unnecessary or unrelated to the main purpose or the pith and substance of the Act which is giving subsidies, services and benefits," the top law officer said.
Advertisement
COMMENTS
Advertisement
Restrictive Statutory Provisions Don't Prevent Bail: Supreme Court Publish NEET-UG Results City-Wise And Centre-Wise, Supreme Court Tells NTA "GPS, 7-Layer Security": Exam Body's Defence In Supreme Court NEET Case On CCTV, Gym Trainer Picks Up Club, Hits Mumbai Man On Head During Workout 'Entire NEET Paper Solved In 45 Minutes Before Exam?': Top Court To Centre "In Order To See...": Trump On Why He Tilted Head Before Assassin Fired Trump Shooter's Father Called Cops About Missing Gun Before Attack: Report Application Process For Chief Engineer, Project Manager Begins Hulk Hogan Tears Off Shirt In Support Of Donald Trump At Republican Event Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world.