Bookmark
PDF
Share
CaseIQ

Justice K.S Puttaswamy (Retired) And Another v. Union Of India And Others

Supreme Court Of India

Sep 23, 2013

Judgment

CaseIQ

Smart Summary (Beta)

Factual and Procedural Background

The order concerns multiple connected proceedings relating to the Aadhaar card. The Court issued notice in WP (C) No. 829 of 2013 and allowed an application to delete the name of Petitioner 1 in TP (C) No. 47 of 2013. After hearing counsel, the Court allowed transfer petitions in TPs (Civil) Nos. 47-48 of 2013 and TP (Civil) No. 476 of 2013. In consequence, WP (C) No. 439 of 2012 titled S. Raju v. Govt. of India, pending before the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, and PIL No. 10 of 2012 titled Vickram Crishna v. UIDAI, pending before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, were transferred to this Court. The registries of the High Courts of Madras and Bombay were directed to transmit the original records expeditiously. The Court further directed that all matters be listed for final hearing after the conclusion of a Constitution Bench. Pending that final hearing, the Court issued interim directions related to the Aadhaar card.

Legal Issues Presented

The opinion addresses a procedural matter and does not frame distinct legal issues.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Transfer petitions: The Court recorded that, having regard to the facts and circumstances and after hearing learned counsel, it was satisfied that the requests for transfer in TPs (Civil) Nos. 47-48 of 2013 and TP (Civil) No. 476 of 2013 should be allowed. On that basis, it ordered the transfer of WP (C) No. 439 of 2012 (S. Raju v. Govt. of India) from the High Court of Madras and PIL No. 10 of 2012 (Vickram Crishna v. UIDAI) from the High Court of Bombay to this Court, and directed the respective registries to send the original records promptly.
Case management: The Court determined that all the matters require a final hearing and therefore directed listing of all matters for final hearing after the conclusion of the Constitution Bench, indicating an intention to bring the issues to a conclusive adjudication in due course.
Interim directions on Aadhaar: Pending final hearing, the Court issued interim protective directions. It ordered that no person should suffer for not obtaining an Aadhaar card despite circulars by some authorities purporting to make it mandatory. At the same time, it directed that when a person voluntarily applies for an Aadhaar card, authorities must verify eligibility under law and ensure that Aadhaar is not issued to any illegal immigrant. These directions balance avoidance of hardship with compliance with legal entitlements.
Ancillary procedural relief: The Court issued notice in WP (C) No. 829 of 2013 and allowed the application for deletion of the name of Petitioner 1 in TP (C) No. 47 of 2013, reflecting routine procedural housekeeping within the connected matters.

Holding and Implications

Core Holdings:

NOTICE ISSUED in WP (C) No. 829 of 2013.
APPLICATION ALLOWED for deletion of the name of Petitioner 1 in TP (C) No. 47 of 2013.
TRANSFER PETITIONS ALLOWED in TPs (Civil) Nos. 47-48 of 2013 and TP (Civil) No. 476 of 2013; WP (C) No. 439 of 2012 (S. Raju v. Govt. of India) and PIL No. 10 of 2012 (Vickram Crishna v. UIDAI) are transferred to this Court, with a direction to the High Courts of Madras and Bombay to transmit original records expeditiously.
LIST FOR FINAL HEARING after the Constitution Bench concludes.
INTERIM DIRECTIONS ISSUED: No person should suffer for not obtaining an Aadhaar card despite any circulars making it mandatory; voluntary applications must be scrutinized for legal entitlement, and Aadhaar must not be issued to any illegal immigrant.

Implications: The immediate effect is consolidation of related proceedings before this Court and the preservation of parties' rights through interim protection: individuals are shielded from adverse consequences for not possessing an Aadhaar card, while authorities must ensure issuance only to those entitled under law and not to illegal immigrants. The matters will proceed to a final hearing after the Constitution Bench. The order sets no new precedent beyond these case-specific procedural and interim directions.

Show all summary ...

Order

1. Issue notice in WP (C) No. 829 of 2013. Application for deletion of the name of Petitioner 1 in TP (C) No. 47 of 2013 is allowed.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where the prayer for transfer in TPs (Civil) Nos. 47-48 of 2013 and TP (Civil) No. 476 of 2013 is to be allowed. On the facts of the case, we allow these transfer petitions and direct that WP (C) No. 439 of 2012 titled S. Raju v. Govt. of India pending before the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature of Madras and PIL No. 10 of 2012 titled Vickram Crishna v. UIDAI pending before the High Court of Judicature of Bombay be transferred to this Court. The Registry of the High Court of Madras and the Registry of the High Court of Bombay are requested to transmit the original records to this Court expeditiously. These transfer petitions are accordingly allowed.

3. All the matters require to be heard finally. List all matters for final hearing after the Constitution Bench is over.

4. In the meanwhile, no person should suffer for not getting the Aadhaar card in spite of the fact that some authority had issued a circular making it mandatory and when any person applies to get the Aadhaar card voluntarily, it may be checked whether that person is entitled for it under the law and it should not be given to any illegal immigrant.

Court Masters