Pre-cum-Mains GS Foundation Program for UPSC 2026 | Starting from 5th Dec. 2024 Click Here for more information
Context:
A five-judges bench of Supreme Court have upheld the passage of Aadhaar Act as a Money Bill.
What is Aadhaar
- The Aadhaar is the name of the Unique Identification Number that the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) issues to every resident of India.
- It is a twelve-digit number which is linked the resident’s demographic and biometric information.
- The data is collected by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), a statutory authority established in January 2009 by the Government of India, under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
- It is under the provisions of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, benefits and services) Act, 2016.
What is UIDAI?
- The Unique Identification Authority of India was established in 2009 and functions as part of the Planning Commission of India.
- UIDAI is a government agency that has been mandated by the government to develop, identify and set up the necessary infrastructure for issuing Aadhaar cards to ensure
- Elimination of duplicate and fake identities, and
- Person Authentication in an easy, cost-effective way.
Aadhaar Act, 2016
- The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, benefits and services) Act, 2016 was passed as a money bill on the 11 March 2016 by the Lok Sabha.
- It aims to provide legal backing to the Aadhaar unique identification number project.
Objectives of Aadhaar Act, 2016:
- Aadhaar Act seeks to provide efficient, transparent and targeted delivery of subsidies, benefits and services to individuals residing in India by assigning them unique identity numbers (UID) or Aadhaar number.
- It will be used for all benefits that will be linked to consolidated fund of India or the expenditure incurred from it.
- Both central and state governments can use Aadhaar for disbursal of benefits and subsidies.
Why Aadhaar was needed:
- To facilitate the access to host of governmental benefits and services seamlessly like subsidies, pensions, ration, bank accounts etc. creating an integrated interface.
- A unique ID would cut down the need of different IDs for various purposes like Driving License, Bank account, Voter ID, Ration card etc, thereby easing compliance for the beneficiaries.
- A clear registration and recognition of the individual identity with the state is necessary to implement their rights, to employment, education, food etc.
- To prevent leakages and corruption by removing ghost accounts of multiple beneficiaries and kickbacks of various officials at every stage, thereby ensuring full benefits of any scheme reach the beneficiary.
- Reduced paperwork and compliance cutting down the government’s operating costs and resulting in savings for the exchequer.
- This will lead to transition towards a less-cash, financially inclusive society.
The Supreme Court judgment
- The Supreme Court struck down several provisions in the Aadhaar Act. However, the bench has ruled Centre’s flagship Aadhaar scheme as constitutionally valid.
Debate over the recent Supreme Court Judgement:
- In a recent Judgement, five-judges Bench of SC says the Bills is a reasonable restriction on individual privacy that fulfils the government’s aim to provide dignity to a large and marginalized population.
- However, there are several arguments made by dissenting voices, arguing that Adhaar Act is unconstitutional and it is against the fundamental right of Privacy and Dignity of Individual such as:
| If the woman no longer works, or has never worked in the same organization as the man who committed the sexual harassment, which authority should she approach? | 1. If the sexual harassment took place while she was employed by the organization, she can file a complaint even after she has left. If she had never been employed by the organization, she may file a complaint with the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of the organization where the man works, if the harassment has taken place in the course of work, or in relation to the man’s professional activities. 2. The woman may also file a complaint before the Local Complaints Committee, which is to be constituted in every district. 3. The woman may also opt to file a criminal complaint under IPC Section 354A and other relevant sections. The law allows the woman to access remedies under civil and criminal law simultaneously. |
|---|---|
| Up to when can a complaint be reasonably followed up? | The Act provides for a limitation of 90 days for filing of complaints; this may be extended by another 90 days by the Internal Committee if the delay is reasonably explained. In criminal law, there is a limitation period ranging from one year to three years depending on the nature of the offence. There is no limitation period for filing a complaint of rape with the police. In Punita K Sodhi v Union of India and Ors (2010), Delhi High Court held that the concept of limitation may not find relevance in a case of sexual harassment, as sexual harassment ought not to be viewed as a one-time incident, but the impact of sexual harassment must be taken into consideration to understand it as a continuing wrong. |
| Some medical, journalism and legal professionals have complained of harassment from men they have met for professional reasons on neutral territory outside the workplaces of both. Can her employers take up her complaint with his employers, or should the police be involved? | 1. A complaint can be filed with regard to any incident of sexual harassment which takes place in the course of work, or in the course of activities associated with discharge of professional duties. 2. If the sexual harassment is committed on “neutral territory” the woman can file a complaint with the Internal Committee of her organization. 3. However, this IC may not have the power to impose an effective penalty on the man who committed the harassment. The woman may file a complaint with the IC of the organization that the man is employed with. |
| If the alleged incident involves individuals working in the same organisation, but has taken place in a private space outside the premises of the workplace and outside of work hours, will that be a fit case to be taken up by their employer? | It must be kept in mind that even while the act of sexual harassment has taken place in a private space outside of work hours, the relationship between the two parties has arisen during the course of work, and these two persons will continue to share a professional relationship. |
| On whom does the burden of proof lie when there are no witnesses to the alleged incident? | The burden of proof, whether in civil or in criminal proceedings, always and only lies with the woman who makes the complaint. In criminal proceedings the charge will have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, since the penalty involves restraint on personal liberty. In civil proceedings, the standard of proof is preponderance of probabilities, since the penalties are civil in nature. |
| Do certain circumstances, such as one or both parties having consumed alcohol, constitute legitimate defense for an action that the woman deems to be sexual harassment? | The consumption of alcohol or atmosphere of a party are not defenses for transgressions over a woman’s sovereign right over her body, either in law or in civilized behavior |
| Can a past or continuing romantic relationship constitute legitimate defence for an action that the woman deems to be sexual harassment? | No, it cannot be a defense, particularly since recent judgments of the Supreme Court including on Privacy and Adultery recognize the bodily and sexual autonomy of women as a fundamental right. It is important to note that the employer has a duty to provide a safe work environment for all employees irrespective of the past or present relationship between the two parties |
| State / UT Name | PVTGs Name |
|---|---|
| Andhra Pradesh and Telangana | Bodo Gadaba, Bondo Poroja, Chenchu, Dongria Khond, Gutob Gadaba, Khond Poroja, Kolam, Kondareddis, Konda Savaras, Kutia Khond, Parengi Poroja, Thoti |
| Bihar and Jharkhand | Asurs, Birhor, Birjia, Hill Kharia, Konvas, Mal Paharia, Parhaiyas, Sauda Paharia, Savar |
| Jharkhand | Same as above |
| Gujarat | Kathodi, Kohvalia, Padhar, Siddi, Kolgha |
| Karnataka | Jenu Kuruba, Koraga |
| Kerala | Cholanaikayan (a section of Kattunaickans), Kadar, Kattunayakan, Kurumbas, Koraga |
| Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh | Abujh Macias, Baigas, Bharias, Hill Korbas, Kamars, Saharias, Birhor |
| Chhattisgarh | Same as above |
| Maharashtra | Katkaria (Kathodia), Kolam, Maria Gond |
| Manipur | Marram Nagas |
| Odisha | Birhor, Bondo, Didayi, Dongria-Khond, Juangs, Kharias, Kutia Kondh, Lanjia Sauras, Lodhas, Mankidias, Paudi Bhuyans, Soura, Chuktia Bhunjia |
| Rajasthan | Seharias |
| Tamil Nadu | Kattu Nayakans, Kotas, Kurumbas, Irulas, Paniyans, Todas |
| Tripura | Reangs |
| Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand | Buxas, Rajis |
| West Bengal | Birhor, Lodhas, Totos |
| Andaman & Nicobar Islands | Great Andamanese, Jarawas, Onges, Sentinelese, Shorn Pens |
Benefits sought by the Supreme Court in its judgement:
Supreme Court has necessitated the Aadhaar linkage for certain services due to the following benefits:
- To plug leakages in subsidy schemes and to have better targeting of welfare benefits
- To prevent denial of rights and legal entitlements to marginalized section of society who are dependent on the government schemes and benefits.
- To bring in regulations for an effective mechanism for delivery of public oriented services.
Challenges Remains after Aadhaar Verdict:
- Aadhaar scheme does not provide robust mechanism to get consent of citizens before collecting their demographic and biometric data.
- Aadhaar has serious problems about exclusion and right to benefits cannot be made dependent on authentication of Aadhaar
- There is no institutional responsibility of the UIDAI to protect the data of citizens and there is absence of a regulatory mechanism to provide robust data protection.
- Leakage in the verification log poses risk of biometric data being vulnerable to unauthorized exploitation by third parties
- Adequate norms must be laid down for steps from collection to retention of biometric data.
- Due to lack of robust infrastructure, like availability of scanning machine or internet connection, people have been denied services like rations, salaries, pensions etc.
- Absence of an alternate mechanism in case of failure of biometric authentication.
- SC is silent about the way to erase Aadhaar data which has already been taken by Banks, Telecom Companies etc.
- Aadhaar verdict may delay KYC for payment wallets, telcos, banks, mutual funds as they have to redefine the verification process.
Way Forward:
- Government should formulate a comprehensive mechanism to plug loopholes with respect to data protection and build a comprehensive data protection plan.
- Infrastructural gaps, like internet coverage, reliable and efficient machines, trained manpower, needs to be plugged for efficient targeted delivery of services dependent on Aadhaar.
- Alternate mechanism is needed in case of Biometric Failure to avail Government benefits.
- A plan should be envisaged for data erasing from previous seeding and in future cases if it falls in wrong hands.
- Alternate ID proofs should be made equally valid as Aadhaar until all the population is covered with Aadhaar enrollment even in the services where aadhaar linking has been made mandatory.
Discover more from Free UPSC IAS Preparation For Aspirants
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
