Aadhaar: When the Govt Tries To Bulldoze Supreme Court Judgement  
The five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court, in September last year, had restricted the mandatory use of Aadhaar to welfare programmes for which the money has been provided from the Consolidated Fund of India. The apex court also struck down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act that had allowed banks, telcos and other private entities to use Aadhaar. However, notwithstanding the Supreme Court judgement, the government is trying to make sure that private entities continue to use Aadhaar. In addition, Ravi Shankar Prasad, the law minister, has said that the government will bring a Bill to make it mandatory to link driving licences with Aadhaar. But more about it later. 
 
Last week, the Narendra Modi-led government passed the Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha with very little debate or scrutiny. The Bill is now in the Rajya Sabha. On an earlier occasion, when the upper house has rejected Aadhaar Act, the government got it passed as money bill by bypassing the Rajya Sabha.
 
Legal scholar, Dr Usha Ramanathan, says, "The Aadhaar Act was passed as a Money Bill. The Court was able to uphold the Act only after they struck down Section 57, which allows business interests to use the Aadhaar system. This new amendment attempts to get past that by a convoluted method—offline verification as may be specified by regulations, leaving it to the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to experiment on us, and includes things like virtual ID, and other forms using the number."  
 
Rethink Aadhaar campaign says it is alarmed by the government misleading Parliament on the Aadhaar Amendments Bill, and on the purported savings resulting from linking Aadhaar to various welfare schemes. 
 
"Mr Prasad claimed the amendments proposed in the Bill are 'in compliance with the SC order'. This is not true, and the SC has nowhere directed the government to frame laws for linking Aadhaar to mobile or banking services. Right from the day of the SC judgment the government has manipulated the Court's directions with an aim to expand Aadhaar applications, with Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on the day after the judgement hinting that the government may bring a new law to allow continued use of Aadhaar by private companies," it added.
 
According to Dr Ramanathan, the amendments allow not only offline verification, but also authentication, supposedly with the consent of the individual. She says, "After the judgement of the apex court, the use of the Aadhaar system by private and business interests is prohibited. Using 'voluntary' and 'consent' as a cover does not make it right. In Para 367 of the majority judgment, the judges had only said, 'if such a person voluntary wants to offer Aadhaar card as a proof of his/her identity, there may not be a problem'. That does not allow the use of the Aadhaar system, not even voluntarily."
 
The Supreme Court had allowed the use of Aadhaar for Section 7—which is for delivery of services, benefits and subsidies. On the issue of failures in linking and in authentication which has resulted in starvation deaths, the apex court merely said that the attorney general had stated that the government would take care of this. "Now, in this amendment, they say only this: provided that the requesting entity shall, in case of failure to authenticate due to illness, injury or infirmity owing to old age or otherwise or any technical or other reasons, provide such alternate and viable means of identification of the individual, as may be specified by regulations". This amendment, in other words, does nothing for the poor, only for business interest, which the court said could not be done using this project, Dr Ramanathan added.
 
Over the years, the government has been trying to make big claims on savings due to Aadhaar which were found to be not true. In fact, both Mr Prasad and finance minister Arun Jaitley's claims of Rs90,000 crore saving due to Aadhaar, are based on a report from the World Bank, although the Bank itself had debunked the report. "The report from the World Bank talks about total extrapolated value of direct benefit transfers was misrepresented as savings. As Dr Reetika Khera pointed out, the World Bank only perpetuated claims that were subsequently disowned by the government. The latest claims are again false and an attempt to mislead Parliament," Rethink Aadhaar says in a statement.
 
 
According to Dr Anupam Saraph, a renowned expert in governance of complex systems, who also advises governments and businesses across the world, neither the ministry of finance nor any government ministry or department has provided any indication of the steps in the flow of funds from the Consolidated Fund of India to the hands of the beneficiaries. 
 
"UIDAI and ministry of finance must certify that this money has been transferred to real and genuine beneficiaries. Neither the recipients’ database nor the money transfers have been audited or seem to have been verified by the CAG. Furthermore, no beneficiary database, or even the basis for inclusion or exclusion of beneficiaries from this database, is available with the public. The UIDAI has stated unambiguously that it takes no responsibility for the use of Aadhaar. It cannot recognise the use, or the absence of use, of Aadhaar in any business process. Neither can it certify the beginning, progress or completion of the business process," Dr Saraph, says in his article published by Sunday Guardian.
 
In her article in the Economic Times, Dr Khera and Jean Dreze say the numbers touted as saving due to Aadhaar by the government have no solid basis. "...the savings estimates do not pertain to Aadhaar as such but to the use of digital technology in subsidy transfers. Indeed, the smart cards study invoked in the said footnote does not involve Aadhaar at all. Even in the direct benefit transfer for liquefied petroleum gas (DBT-L) experiment, Aadhaar is only one component of the project, and a direct bank transfer can itself increase enforcement, irrespective of unique ID. The $11 billion figure (quoted in the World Bank report) is routinely construed as an estimate of ‘Aadhaar-enabled savings’," the article says.  
 
Earlier in August 2016, a report from the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), said, 92% of the Rs23,316.21 crore the government saved in subsidy payout in FY15-16 occurred due to a drop in crude oil prices and both the government and oil marketing companies had overstated savings under the scheme.
 
The actual subsidy payout during April-December 2015 was Rs12,084.24 crore against Rs35,400.46 crore during the same period in 2014.
 
Moneylife had reported that Aadhaar and DBTL savings for FY2016 were less than 1% or Rs121 crore, excluding the costs of implementation, as against finance minister Mr Jaitley's claim of an estimated saving of Rs15,000 crore. The news report was based on a revelation by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) based on publicly available information. (Read: Ghost Savings in DBTL: 99% gap between Jaitley’s claims and actual savings)
 
Delivering his address at the 106th Indian Science Congress, Mr Prasad, the minister for law, electronics and information technology, has said the government will soon make it mandatory for linking Aadhaar with driving licences.  
 
"At present, what happens is that the guilty person who causes an accident flees the scene and gets a duplicate licence. This helps him go scot-free. However, with the Aadhaar linkage you can change your name but you cannot change your biometrics, neither iris nor fingerprints. So the moment you go in for a duplicate licence, the system will say this person already has a driving licence and should not be given a new one," the minister was quoted as saying in a report.
 
The only problem with this, according to Dr Saraph, is that the UIDAI does not certify the biometric or demographic data associated with any Aadhaar number. "It (UIDAI) seems to have no view about the number of unique records based on biometric or demographic fields. It does not even know if there was an enrolment operator, belonging to a private agency appointed by one of the 20 registrars whose enrolments make up most of the Aadhaar numbers, in the 600,000 villages, 5,000 towns and cities, or even the 707 districts where enrolment allegedly happened. It has no information about the original documents of proof of identity, address or birth used to capture the demographic data for Aadhaar. Furthermore, the Aadhaar database has never been verified or audited. It is the world’s largest database of ghosts and duplicates. Using the Aadhaar to create or modify any database can, therefore, entail the risk of populating those databases with duplicates and ghosts," he added. (Read: #Aadhaar: UIDAI cannot make any assertion about the uniqueness of identity, RTI reply show s )
 
In that case, nobody seems to ask how the linking of Aadhaar with driving licence will help reduce number of accidents. Or whether the government want to reduce number of accidents or bulldoze Aadhaar into driving licence system. While Aadhaar is unverified, unaudited and unauthenticated number, an official from the regional transport office (RTO), by signing on the driving licence, is liable for the information. No official from any government authority or even UIDAI neither signs on Aadhaar nor is liable for genuineness of the information and data recorded in their database.
 
Rethink Aadhaar, along with eminent civil society members, petitioners in the Aadhaar matters that were the subject of the 26 September 2018 judgement, as well as other citizens of India, demands that members of Parliament (MPs) in the Rajya Sabha should immediately send the Bill for a legislative review by a Select Committee of Rajya Sabha, and public consultation. 
 
You may also want to read...
 
 
 
 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

P M Ravindran

4 days ago

I am among those who are not enamored by the contents or timing of the adhaar judgement of the apex court.

Questions about adhaar and its validity had been raised since the beginning when the idea itself was mooted. It was after a couple of years after enrollments began that even a law was enacted to give it legality. And being offered free there were no dearth of enrollment then too. Cases had been filed in the apex court, questioning the adhaar, even before the NDA government took over and went into a mission mode to use it even for reservations in railways. The court sat on them all the while when it had convened a sitting at midnight to over rule the discretion of the Governor of Karnataka in deciding to seek a vote of confidence in the Legislative Assembly. And then finally it wakes up and gives a half baked judgment which has not taken cognizance of any the issues listed here.

I had been an opponent of the system based on reports that developed countries like the US of A, UK and Australia had tried to introduce similar systems but given up due to privacy and cost issues. And in India, in 70 years we have not even been able to streamline the issue of ration cards. Yes, in the last fortnight only it was reported that the Chairperson of the Kerala State Women's Commission, Ms Josephine, had two cards- one BPL card along with her husband and another ordinary with her brother's family at a different location! And what did the government do? Just cancel those cards! Those who have transferred their ration cards from one place to another would recognize the rigmarole they had to go through and who all will have to be prosecuted for the lapses or connivance.

I wouldn't be wrong in plagiarizing Constantin Demiris in Sydney Sheldon's The Other Side of Midnight and say that a thousand times more crimes have been committed in the name of justice by our judges than by all the criminals they have convicted so far.

HETAL BHAGAVATPRASAD TRIVEDI

7 days ago

I have been thinking about opening an online account with Zerodha for a while. Today, while checking out the details for their requirements (relevant page URL: https://support.zerodha.com/category/account-opening/online-account-opening/articles/what-documents-do-i-need-to-open-an-account ), I find that Aadhar appears to be a requirement for opening an account with them!

Going thru' the details of the alternate offered by them as Offline account, appears to be for BSDA (Basic Service DMAT Account, which I am interpreting as a non-trading account)

Am I missing something?

How is it that they still continue to ask for Aadhar details!

B. KRISHNAN

1 week ago

Why this "kola veri" about a unique identification system which has more benefits than deficiencies? Those who are opposed to adhaar are those who hate transparency. I have not come across a single case where adhaar has resulted in any loss or difficulty to any one. The Mumbai person who lose money did so because of he did not use safeguards available in all banking activities; it was not because of adhaar fault.

Chethan K Nataraj

1 week ago

You people are writing so much about Aadhaar Ban by supreme court, I appreciate your work. But my exp is where ever I go be it Post office to open an NSC they just say till now we have not got any orders from govt to stop taking Aadhaar and till then you are suppose to furnish else we will not open an NSC.

Go to any govt dept they just ask abt Aadhaar else our work will not be done at all and we land up giving it to get our work done in the eleventh hour.

REPLY

MDT

In Reply to Chethan K Nataraj 1 week ago

The order from the Supreme Court is very clear on where Aadhaar can be used and where it cannot be. And since the judgement by the apex court is law of the land, the govt offices, post office or anyone else who is not authorised to use Aadhaar, simply cannot ask for it or make it mandatory for anything. Here is the link to the SC order https://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/supremecourt/2012/35071/35071_2012_Judgement_26-Sep-2018.pdf Check majority judgement at around page no576 and show it to the concerned govt officials with a warning that what they are doing is contempt of the Supreme Court.

NARAYANAN KANNAN

1 week ago

I am a NRI where I am living, government issued Adhar like identity Number which is required from accounts opening, telephone connection, hiring a house, almost for all activities. If my understanding is correct in US also the same. We are all aware when we started to use credit card or application of visa for foreign countries we need to provide our full family history. Why are we opossing to provide basic details (Adhar) ? Am I missing some thing to understand. Please educate me. I am very much interested to learn and understand opposite view. All my above view is from my personal experience. I do not want to speak on behalf of any one. Please help me to understand. Thank you.

REPLY

MDT

In Reply to NARAYANAN KANNAN 1 week ago

Thanks for your comment. Major difference between SSN in the US and Aadhaar in India is collection of biometrics and use by any sundry entity. Plus, in other places, the ID doesn't determine the beneficiary, it helps only in identification, while human officials take the decision on benefits/services. Here Aadhaar is being mad into the decision maker depriving crores of senior citizens (biometric mismatch), destitute people the benefit/ service aimed at them. Do read this https://www.moneylife.in/public-interest/aadhaar for more info.

Sudhir Jatar

1 week ago

I hope the Supreme Court catches on when the matter comes before it in the new Amendment Bill and these points are taken up in the review petition to be filed.

Dr.Dhananjaya Bhupathi

1 week ago

https://www.moneylife.in/article/aadhaar-when-the-govt-tries-to-bulldoze-supreme-court-judgement/56062.html
1. Why GOI is indulging in such foolish acts in violation to SC judgment?
2. Is it the handiwork of duds of adhocism in PMO/UFM?
3. SBI has been experiencing, when its customers are losing INR in crores. An NRI from Mumbai lost Rs.1.75 crores from his Savings Acount on getting 6 missed calls on his mobile.
4. Are there any brains in RSS/BJP cadres to arrest this foolish + hasty act?
5. Instead of going in for ‘false prestige’, Shri Narendra Modi, Shri Arun Jaitley + Shri Prasad must apply their minds & pass the bill in tune with SC Judgement.
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7fOf8rUrdw
7. SATYAMAEVA JAYATHE!!!

Gurudutt Mundkur

1 week ago

Any suggestions from you for protecting the several illegal uses of driving lessons?
No point in your just criticising every Govt move.
Every time you criticise, give an alternative suggestion then only it means you have applied your mind.

REPLY

Saravanan R

In Reply to Gurudutt Mundkur 1 week ago

Well said as for citizens who are watching the anti-corruption measures. So it is only the opposition parties who were/are being affected by Aadhaar linking. They only instigate global media to dig out its weakness. To support prevention of digging out of foreign money receipts or deposits abroad. Real politics. Manmohan Singh and Nandan Nilakeni were heckled at and intercepted aadhaar's release and promotion. Finance Ministry played big part in that game.

Sudhir Jatar

In Reply to Gurudutt Mundkur 1 week ago

The alternative solution is obvious. Aadhaar should not be there at all. That is what most of us petitioned the Supreme Court about.

Aadhaar: Govt Tries To Push Commercial Use of the UID through Amendment Despite Ban by SC
The Central government's doublespeak on Aadhaar, the 12-digit unique biometrics-linked identification number, continues. Despite the five-judge constitutional bench of Supreme Court barring the use of Aadhaar for commercial purposes, the government is amending several laws like the Aadhaar Act, Indian Telegraph Act and Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to bring back the validity of mandating or using Aadhaar for various purposes. On Wednesday, Ravi Shankar Prasad, minister of law and justice, introduced Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Act 2018, in the Lok Sabha.   
 
After passing the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits, and Services) Act as a Money Bill, by claiming that Aadhaar enables welfare, the government enabled rampant commercial use of citizens' data. Now, when the Supreme Court has reined in Aadhaar by striking down Section 57 of the 2016 Act, which permitted the use of Aadhaar by private entities, the government is amending laws to again allow private, commercial use of citizens' Aadhaar-related data, says Rethink Aadhaar in a statement.
 
The government has introduced in the Lok Sabha the Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2018. There are serious concerns with this Bill as it violates Supreme Court orders as well as citizens' fundamental rights:
 
1. The Bill Is in Contravention of SC judgement - The Supreme Court, in its judgement dated 26 September 2018 in Justice KS Puttaswamy vs Union of India (the Aadhaar judgment) in WP Civil No. 494 of 2012 explicitly prohibited use of Aadhaar by private parties by declaring Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, as unconstitutional. This section provided grounds for Aadhaar-based authentication by private entities as well. The present Bill proposes amendments to the Aadhaar Act, Telegraph Act and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which will circumvent the SC judgment, and allow the continued use of Aadhaar-based e-KYC authentication by private entities for mobile and banking services, respectively. 
 
1. The Bill may allow private entities to continue to hold Aadhaar data in disregard of SC judgment- After the SC judgment, private entities are no longer allowed to maintain any Aadhaar-related data records whatsoever. While the petitioners have been trying to push for compliance on this, the government's latest move may encourage the continued collection of citizens' data through use of Aadhaar-based authentication violating the protections laid down by the Supreme Court.
 
1. Privacy and security concerns in Aadhaar remain unaddressed - When private entities were allowed use of Aadhaar-based e-KYC, there were several reports of fraudulent transactions and scamming of citizens' personal data as well as their money. There is no indication that either the finance ministry or the UIDAI has attempted to address these security lapses in the Aadhaar ecosystem. Allowing and encouraging use of Aadhaar-based authentication by private entities will result in further scams and theft.
 
1. Bill lacks any stakeholder consultation - The Government has not undertaken a public consultation on the proposed amendments to the various laws. Any Bill on the issue of Aadhaar should not be merely rubber-stamped by Parliament; any proposed amendment must be fairly and thoroughly studied by the appropriate Parliamentary Standing Committee as well.
 
1. Government can try to bypass Rajya Sabha again - The Rajya Sabha, in March 2016, had voted to curtail private sector Aadhaar usage when it debated the original Aadhaar Act. However, the government over-rode Upper House's farsighted warnings through the Money Bill route. In the SC judgement, Justice DY Chandrachud termed this a "fraud on the Constitution." The government may once again take the Money Bill route to bulldoze these amendments through Parliament despite the fact that the proposed amendments do not confirm to constitutional requirements of a Money Bill. 
 
With these concerns, Rethink Aadhaar, and other citizens and agencies concerned with the rampant expansion and function creep of Aadhaar, have placed following demands before Members of Parliament.
 
  1. Oppose the introduction of the Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2018, in Lok Sabha by MPs across political parties.
  2. Undertake a thorough and transparent public consultation on the Bill and the amendments and introduce any Aadhaar-related legislation in Parliament only after such a consultation
  3.  If the Bill is still introduced, then it immediately be sent to the appropriate Parliamentary Standing Committee for legislative scrutiny and review.
  4. Stop constitutional fraud undermining the Rajya Sabha of allowing this overbroad Amendment Bill to be certified as a Money Bill.
  5. Introduction of a strong, people-centric Personal Data Protection Bill, after adequate public consultation instead as the top priority of the Union Government. Thus far, a Privacy and Data Protection Bill has not even been presented in Parliament, whereas the Supreme Court had accepted assurances from the government that the concerns raised in the Aadhaar matters vis-a-vis data security and informational privacy would be adequately addressed by a soon-to-be-passed data protection law. 
 
“We hope that our elected representatives will bear due vigilance and not allow our fundamental rights to be encroached by such ill thought-out legislation. We urge members of the press to join us in ensuring that the government takes a democratic route for all Aadhaar-related legislation, i.e. undertaking a thorough public consultation and review by a Parliamentary Standing Committee,” the statement says.
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

Deepak Narain

2 weeks ago

Only the government is right. All others are fools. And they wish to be reelected.

SuchindranathAiyerS

2 weeks ago

The BJP will be in the opposition in the 2019 Loka Sabha for several reasons* , but, will the Mahagathbandhan repeal these acts? I doubt it, After all, almost all the BJP's policies have been UPA (Congress) policies

A few key points that make Modi Sarkar out to be a Congress Sarkar (which was rejected in 2014) in disguise include:

(1) Profligate Pay and Perks Hikes to Netas, Babus, Cops and Milards;

(2) Attempts to financially crush the lower middle class by lowering interest rates, attempting to tax EPF etc. while fanning the flames of inflation through economic mismanagement, profligacy and corruption;

(3) Atrocities Act to circumvent a rare Supreme Court judgement that actually upholds the near extinct notion of “equity” in India,

(4) Championing corruption by criminalizing the victims of extortion while granting immunity to Govt extortionists, retrospective (i.e. Pranab Mukerjee type) law exempting political parties from Foreign Currency Regulation Act; exempting lawyers from GST to facilitate bribery of Judges, election bonds to formalize/legalize political corruption;

(5) Pampering and appeasing Moslems, Dalits etc,

(6) Criticising Gau Rakshaks and otherwise persecuting the much persecuted and maligned “Hindoos”,

(7) Banks under the Mahdi-Jet Lee Sarkar extorted 50, 000 Crores from you and me in unjustifiable charges such as minimum balance etc.:

(8) The absurd, stupid and vicious way in which Demonetization, GST, Aadhar and other Tax matters have been handled.

(9) Doing nothing at all about any of its election promises but, instead, pursuing all the policies of the rejected opposition. For example, the very first law made by the BJP was the Congress Bill to send Neta-Babus abroad with family and friends for medical treatment at my expense, while ordinary, Non Governmental Indians are denied proper medical services and even proper Doctors who are, nowadays, all created, not by merit or competence, but by caste and bribes!

In 2014, in very many constituencies, the BJP won thanks to marginal vote swings created by a coagulation of Savarna sentiment and the lower middle classes (Internationally,"Poor"). This then is the constituency that has requited the BJP's betrayal, along with all those others who hoped for change in 2014.

Aadhaar Judgement: Petitioners Send Legal Notices to DoT, TRAI, RBI & UIDAI for Non-compliance with the Supreme Court Order
Petitioners, irked by the non-compliance of the Supreme Court order on Aadhaar, have sent legal notices to department of telecommunications (DoT), the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the ministry of communications, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
 
In their representations, Dr Kalyani Menon Sen and Nachiket Udupa have asked DoT, TRAI, ministry of communications, and UIDAI to take immediate action to suspend Aadhaar-based mobile subscriber verification and also delete all subscriber information obtained through Aadhaar-based e-know-your-customer (eKYC). They have also asked that the agencies direct the various telecom service providers to provide subscribers a full account of the data collected. Further, the petitioners demanded that adequate compensation be paid to subscribers for unlawful collection of data.
 
Dr Sen, in a separate notice to RBI, has demanded that RBI direct banks to cease Aadhaar-based e-KYC for bank accounts, shut down all Aadhaar-enabled payment systems (AePS), and halt the seeding of Aadhaar numbers against bank accounts or any other databases. In addition, the letter demands that any Aadhaar details, including the Aadhaar number, and demographic details collected from citizens be deleted in a timely manner that is duly communicated to the public. 
 
It has been over three months since the Supreme Court gave its judgement on Aadhaar. The judgment struck down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act as unconstitutional. This Section allowed banks, mobile service providers and other private entities to use Aadhaar-based authentication.
 
Here is what the Supreme Court has stated about use of Aadhaar by private entities, in its 26th September judgement on Aadhaar…
 
Page 560-561:
 
“(h) Insofar as Section 57 in the present form is concerned, it is susceptible to misuse inasmuch as:
 
a) It can be used for establishing the identity of an individual ‘for any purpose’. We read down this provision to mean that such a purpose has to be backed by law. Further, whenever any such “law” is made, it would be subject to judicial scrutiny. 
 
b) Such purpose is not limited pursuant to any law alone but can be done pursuant to ‘any contract to this effect’ as well. This is clearly impermissible as a contractual provision is not backed by a law and, therefore, first requirement of proportionality test is not met. 
 
c) Apart from authorising the State, even ‘any body corporate or person’ is authorised to avail authentication services, which can be on the basis of purported agreement between an individual and such body corporate or person.
 
Even if we presume that legislature did not intend so, the impact of the aforesaid features would be to enable commercial exploitation of an individual biometric and demographic information by the private entities. 
 
Thus, this part of the provision, which enables body corporate and individuals also to seek authentication, that too on the basis of a contract between the individual and such body corporate or person, would impinge upon the right to privacy of such individuals. This part of the section, thus, is declared unconstitutional.” 
 
Since the judgment, any use of Aadhaar for mobile, bank accounts, or by private entities has become automatically illegal. 
 
While citizens are waiting for full compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in the Aadhaar matters, two of the petitioners have sent letters to the appropriate authorities demanding immediate compliance. 
 
You may also want to read…
 
 
 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

Bits Singh

2 weeks ago

Banks still are demanding aadhar card, private companies asking aadhar from customers or employees. Its really sad that the judgement has no effect om them. Unless and until punitive action is taken against them they may continue to break the judgement.

Arvind BaagDe

2 weeks ago

When s c. Can't lement it's orders either the defaulters should hanged or the honourable judges who passed orders should resigned.

Sri Ram

2 weeks ago

Private financial institutions win again, kudos to master, visa and their concerted campaign to derail and defang AADHAR. We need a people's referendum and NDA consensus to overturn SC on their shortsighted approach..

kashyap joshipura

2 weeks ago

UIDAI should discontinue its advertisements in various relates to Aadhar enrolments centre and the process of changing details in Aadhar. It should not use public money for its own publicity. .Aadhar Agencies should be directed to vacate the space, given by various Banks and other offices in their premises. UIDAI should also disclose quarterly expenditure incurred for Aadhar related publicity.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

online financial advisory
Pathbreakers
Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
online financia advisory
The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
financial magazines online
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
financial magazines in india
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)