On Monday, Supreme Court decided to see whether Aadhaar Scheme as money Bill in Parliament was constitutionally valid or not? The Government opposed the petition by the former union minister Jairam Ramesh for this challenging action. Lawyer P Chidambaram told J S Khehar holding the bench of chief justice that the provision for Money Bill is being misused by the Government.
Chidambaram, Jairam Ramesh and attorney general Mukul Rohatgi Cited the constitution bench decision that go through this issue earlier. Mukul Rohtagi said, “The court can’t review the ruling of the lok Sabha speaker whether is is procedural or substantial decision.” He also raised the topic of judgments relating to Articles 110, 117 and many others. He said that the petition was not maintainable as no fundamental rights of former union minister were violated by the House passing The Bill.
The Lok Sabha Passed the Bill and the attorney General read the Preamble Bill which gave flesh and blood to this scheme and submitted. It stated that the Aadhaar Scheme for which for which it had to withdraw money from any consolidated fund of India. This scheme also saved thousands crore of rupees which is taken by the Ghosts in ration cards and gas connections.
Chidambaram argued that this could be the new trend if it is accepted as Money Bill by the Government. And this will set new trend among all the states and also as there are 32 legislative houses are in our country. When judges asked Chidambaram that whether the Rajya Sabha accepted it as Money Bill or not when it passed to the legislations, the lawyer answered the upper house could pass any Bill. It made changes and rarely sends it back to Lok Sabha which passed the bill. He read out the constitutional Provisions which defined what Money Bill is and what are Financial Bills.
He said, the Aadhaar Bill did not fall under Money Bill as per the definition of Money Bill. The judges feel that the issue raised is sensitive and the decision on this serious and sensitive matter could not be decided quickly. As a result he asked both the sides to prepare for the final arguments and the next hearing on this issue was ordered to be listed after four week.
The Aadhaar Act 2016 passed on 16 may 2016 in Lok Sabha and faced opposition in parliament.
The move to introduce the money bill has been challenged to bypass the Rajya Sabha completely. Aadhaar Act contains matter other than that incidental to expenditure of consolidated fund it includes biometric based unique identification and is used for number of purpose it is used also as the identification number in government service and other benefits.The objectives and validity of the Aadhaar Act would not actually change if the Aadhaar number no longer was directly connected to the delivery of services. Arvind Datar has emphasized that if the primary purpose of a bill is not governed under Article 110(1) then certifying it as Money Bill is an unconstitutional Act.
Article 110(1) of constitution identifies a bill as Money Bill it contains the following matter.
• Imposition and Regulation of Tax,
• Financial Obligation by Indian Government,
• Deposit or withdrawal from consolidated Fund of India
• Appropriation of Money and expenditure charges on CFI
• Custody issue audit of money into public account.
Although article 110(3) of constitution, the decision of Lok Sabha shall be final in case of question arise regarding bill is under Money Bill or Not. Thus the decision of Lok Sabha speaker to pass the bill as Money Bill is definitely not immune from judicial review. And article 32 of constitution allows the judiciary top decides upon the manner of Aadhaar Act in Parliament.
Now it’s all up to Supreme Court, because SC has to look into the matter for the fundamental and constitutional rights of Indian citizens. The substantial implications of aadhaar Act for national security, primarily privacy and data security make this decision imperative to conduct a balanced deliberation process within or outside the parliament houses. Supreme Court can not only review the Lok Sabha speaker’s decision but should ask the government to draft the Aadhaar bill with public and parliamentary deliberation.