Non-possession of an Aadhaar number or card would not be a disqualification for availing benefits: Meghalaya HC
The Meghalaya High Court on Monday passed an interim order directing the state government to accept alternative identification documents for individuals who are unable to produce an Aadhaar number or card.
According to the court, non-possession of an Aadhaar number or card would not be a disqualification for availing benefits.
The order came in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by social activist Greneth M Sangma challenging a state government notification dated October 31, 2023 which had insisted that a child desirous of availing of the benefit of the Fees Compensation for Post Matric Scholarship for SC/ST students (Free Studentship) (the scheme) or of financial assistance to the SC/ST students of the State who are not eligible for any scholarship had to possess an Aadhaar identification number.
The notification was based on two judgments of the Supreme Court in KS Puttaswamy (Retired) & anr v. Union of India & ors reported in (2015) 8 SCC 735 and another with the same cause title reported in (2019) 1 SCC 1.
The court observed that the Aadhaar Act does not disentitles an individual from benefits if they do not possess an Aadhaar number.
It has also noted that Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act provides for alternative means of identification for individuals who do not have an Aadhaar number.
“Hence, as far as notification dated 31st October, 2023 is concerned, as an interim order we direct that the State government is at full liberty to insist on production of Aadhaar number or Aadhaar card from individuals for their speedy identification.
If an individual is unable to produce the Aadhaar number or card or is unwilling to obtain Aadhaar registration, then he would have to prove his identity as a resident in terms of the said Act from other recognised documents like pan card, voter card, passport and so on to the satisfaction of the State authorities,” said the division bench of Chief Justice IP Mukerji and Justice W Diengdoh in its order.
“In that event, non-possession of an Aadhaar number or card would not be a disqualification,” it also stated.
Under the law laid down in those two judgments, the bench stated that the State government could not insist on requirement of Aadhaar card/number.
“We have made a very preliminary scrutiny of the said Act. It relates to Aadhaar number/card for individuals residing in India getting services, benefits and subsidies met out of the Consolidated Fund of India or the Consolidated Fund of the State. It does not use the word citizen. Section 2(v) defines resident as follows: (v) “resident” means an individual who has resided in India for a period or periods amounting in all to one hundred and eighty-two days or more in the twelve months immediately preceding the date of application for enrolment,” it said while adding “In Section 7 of the said Act it is provided that the Central or the State government may for the purpose of establishing his identity require the individual availing of the above benefits to possess an Aadhaar number. The proviso is very important. It says that: “S.7…. Provided that if an Aadhaar number is not assigned to an individual, the individual shall be offered alternate and viable means of identification for delivery of the subsidy, benefit or service”.
“Therefore, prima facie it does not follow that non-possession of Aadhaar number disentitles an otherwise eligible individual from the above benefits,” the bench further asserted.
The court directed that individuals who are unable to produce an Aadhaar number or card can prove their identity using other recognized documents such as:
The PIL will be listed for further hearing on August 12, 2025, when the court will consider the issue in detail, including the Aadhaar Act, rules, and regulations framed thereunder, and relevant judgments of the Supreme Court.
Facebook
Instagram
Youtube
Twitter
Leave a Reply