Representational picture
New Delhi:
After the Supreme Court knocked the bottom off of the Aadhaar scheme, directing the Centre to withdraw instructions making the card carrying the 12-digit identification number mandatory for availing of the benefits of government-sponsored welfare schemes, questions have been raised about its fate.
There is confusion among the people about its utility. Gulsha Hana, a 21-year-old medical assistant, argues, "It will help a lot. For small things, we had to keep running around, we wouldn't get proofs, This will ensure we have one single proof of identity."
Others demur. "There are less benefits and more problems because of Aadhaar. For example, for services like ration cards, the court has said it's not compulsory to have an Aadhaar card, but if you go to the ration office, your form won't be accepted without the card," says Sanjay, a shopkeeper.
The Supreme Court had last month also ruled that no data, biometric or otherwise, collected by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), the agency that makes Aadhaar cards, could be shared with any third agency including the CBI.
The UPA government's showpiece project has, even otherwise, been hamstrung by the lack of a legislative grounding. The UID bill that gives it statutory sanction could not be passed in Parliament. Another bill required to ease off concerns about privacy infringement worries is also pending parliamentary approval and the standing committee headed by the BJP's Yashwant Sinha has questioned the very basis of Aadhaar.
All eyes are now on the next government at the Centre to give a clue about Aadhaar's future. "Surely there is a serious case to revisit it and have a complete relook, but the party will have to take a call on it," says Ravi Shankar Prasad of the BJP.
The brain behind the UIDAI project, Nandan Nilekani, who is now the Congress candidate from Bangalore South, insists, however, that Aadhaar is a success story. "The Supreme Court ruling won't affect it," he counters.
There is confusion among the people about its utility. Gulsha Hana, a 21-year-old medical assistant, argues, "It will help a lot. For small things, we had to keep running around, we wouldn't get proofs, This will ensure we have one single proof of identity."
Others demur. "There are less benefits and more problems because of Aadhaar. For example, for services like ration cards, the court has said it's not compulsory to have an Aadhaar card, but if you go to the ration office, your form won't be accepted without the card," says Sanjay, a shopkeeper.
The Supreme Court had last month also ruled that no data, biometric or otherwise, collected by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), the agency that makes Aadhaar cards, could be shared with any third agency including the CBI.
The UPA government's showpiece project has, even otherwise, been hamstrung by the lack of a legislative grounding. The UID bill that gives it statutory sanction could not be passed in Parliament. Another bill required to ease off concerns about privacy infringement worries is also pending parliamentary approval and the standing committee headed by the BJP's Yashwant Sinha has questioned the very basis of Aadhaar.
All eyes are now on the next government at the Centre to give a clue about Aadhaar's future. "Surely there is a serious case to revisit it and have a complete relook, but the party will have to take a call on it," says Ravi Shankar Prasad of the BJP.
The brain behind the UIDAI project, Nandan Nilekani, who is now the Congress candidate from Bangalore South, insists, however, that Aadhaar is a success story. "The Supreme Court ruling won't affect it," he counters.
Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world
