- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
JUSTICE K.S.PUTTASWAMY(RETD) v. UNION OF INDIA
Factual and Procedural Background
Multiple writ petitions and related proceedings challenge the Aadhaar programme on constitutional grounds. Earlier interim orders of the Supreme Court (23 Sept 2013; 24 Mar 2014; 16 Mar 2015; 11 Aug 2015; and 15 Oct 2015 by a Constitution Bench) had confined the voluntary use of Aadhaar to six welfare schemes and prohibited making it mandatory. After Parliament enacted the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 (effective 12 July 2016), the Union Government began issuing notifications requiring Aadhaar linkage for a wide range of purposes. The petitioners sought interim relief to restrain these measures until final adjudication. The present order, delivered on 15 December 2017 by a five-judge bench presided over by the Chief Justice, addresses that request for interim relief and sets a schedule for final hearing in January 2018.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the Union Government can compel Aadhaar linkage for various services and benefits despite the earlier interim orders that limited the scheme and maintained its voluntary character.
- Whether enactment of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 nullifies or modifies the force of the Court’s previous interim directions.
- What interim arrangement should govern Aadhaar linkage obligations pending the Constitution Bench’s final decision.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioners’ Arguments
- The Constitution Bench order of 15 October 2015 restricts Aadhaar’s use to six specified schemes and makes enrolment voluntary; the Government must obtain a formal variation of that order before imposing new mandatory requirements.
- Continuing compulsion to link Aadhaar undermines citizens’ fundamental rights and the authority of the judiciary, which had insulated citizens through its interim directions.
Respondents’ Arguments (Union of India and UIDAI)
- The earlier interim directions were issued when no statutory framework existed; with the coming into force of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, the notifications implementing the Act are valid and enforceable.
- Each department will justify the reasonableness of its specific notification, and the statutory mandate should not be stayed.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| (2017) 10 SCC 1 (Judgment of nine Judges dated 24 Aug 2017) | Demonstrates the constitutional importance of the issues raised in the Aadhaar litigation. | Bench noted this judgment to emphasise the need for an early final hearing. |
| Lokniti Foundation v. Union of India & Anr., (2017) 7 SCC 155 | Fixed 6 Feb 2018 as the deadline for completing Aadhaar-based e-KYC for mobile subscribers. | Court referred to this order before extending the e-KYC deadline to 31 Mar 2018. |
| Binoy Visman v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 247 of 2017 | Governs the application of Section 139AA of the Income-tax Act (linking PAN with Aadhaar). | Court clarified that Aadhaar-PAN linkage remains regulated by the decision in this case. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Bench recognised the nationwide significance of the Aadhaar matters and noted that a nine-judge judgment had already examined related constitutional questions. To provide certainty to citizens and governments alike, it fixed 17 January 2018 for commencement of the final hearing, an arrangement accepted by all counsel.
Pending that hearing, the Court considered the Attorney General’s statement extending Government deadlines for Aadhaar linkage. Accepting this statement, the Court:
- Recorded that the Union Government has extended the deadline for linking Aadhaar to all welfare schemes to 31 March 2018.
- Extended the deadline for linking Aadhaar to existing and new bank accounts to 31 March 2018, subject to applicants for new accounts providing proof of having applied for Aadhaar.
- Extended the deadline for completing Aadhaar-based e-KYC for mobile phone subscribers to 31 March 2018.
- Directed that these extensions apply equally to State Governments.
- Clarified that issues under Section 139AA of the Income-tax Act are governed by the earlier judgment in Binoy Visman.
Holding and Implications
Interim relief granted: the last date for mandatory Aadhaar linkage to welfare schemes, bank accounts (existing and new), and mobile phone e-KYC is extended to 31 March 2018; these directions bind both Union and State authorities. The batch of Aadhaar matters is listed for final hearing on 17 January 2018.
Implications: Citizens obtain temporary protection from immediate disabling of services for non-linkage, while the Government gains a uniform extended deadline. No constitutional question is finally decided; the order preserves the status quo and does not create new precedent beyond the interim timeframe.
1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 494 OF 2012
JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD ) AND ANR ..... PETITIONERS
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... RESPONDENTS
WITH T C ( C) NO 151 OF 2013
T C ( C) NO 152 OF 2013
W P (C ) NO 833 OF 2013
W P (C ) NO 829 OF 2013
T P (C ) NO 1797 OF 2013
W P (C ) NO 932 OF 2013
T P (C ) NO 1796 OF 2013
CONT P (C ) NO 144 OF 2014
T P (C ) NO 313 OF 2014
T P (C ) NO 312 OF 2014
2
SLP (CRL ) NO 2524 OF 2014
W P (C ) NO 37 OF 2015
W P (C ) NO 220 OF 2015
CONT P (C ) NO 674 OF 2015
T P (C ) NO 921 OF 2015
CONT P (C ) NO 470 OF 2015
CONT P (C ) NO 444 OF 2016
CONT P (C ) NO 608 OF 2016
W P (C ) NO 797 OF 2016
CONT P (C ) NO 844 OF 2017
W P (C ) NO 342 OF 2017
W P (C) NO 372 OF 2017
W P (C ) NO 1058 OF 2017
W P (C ) NO 966 OF 2017
W P (C ) NO 1014 OF 2017
W P (C ) NO 1002 OF 2017
AND
WITH W P (C ) NO 1056 OF 2017
3
O R D E R S
Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J
1 We have heard submissions on interim relief. The prayer for interim relief at this stage is essentially based on the earlier orders of this Court dated 23 September 2013, 24 March 2014, 16 March 2015, 11 August 2015 and 15 October 2015. The interim directions dated 15 October 2015 were issued by a Constitution Bench. The primary submission of the petitioners is that in terms of the interim order of the Constitution Bench: (i) Aadhaar Cards could permissibly be utilized only for six schemes (two of them provided for in the order dated 11 August 2015 and four in the order dated 15 October 2015); (ii) the Union Government was directed to strictly follow the earlier orders of this Court commencing from 23 September 2013; and (iii) the Aadhaar card scheme was to be purely voluntary and could not be made mandatory until the matter is finally decided by this Court.
2 Mr Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel urged that since the interim order dated 15 March 2015 governs the field it was the obligation of the Union government to seek a variation of the interim directions after the enactment of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and
4
Services) Act, 2016 before making it mandatory to uplink or provide details of the Unique Identification Number/Aadhaar card for all purposes.
3 Mr Gopal Subramanium, learned senior counsel while advancing the same submission urged that the issue involves the paramountcy of the Court and of the judicial process. In the submission of the learned counsel, the exercise of the judicial power in the form of the interim order dated 15 October 2015 (and the earlier orders) was to insulate citizens against any form of compulsion, this being in aid of protecting their fundamental rights.
4 Mr Arvind Datar, Mr KTS Tulsi, Mr Anand Grover, Mr KV Viswanathan, Ms Minakshi Arora and Mr Sanjay Hegde, among other learned counsel urged submissions on various facets in support of the prayer for interim relief.
5 On the other hand, Mr K K Venugopal, the learned Attorney General for India urges that the interim directions were issued in the absence of a legislative framework. After Parliament has enacted the Aadhaar Act, 2016 (which came into force on 12 July 2016) the interim orders would, in his submission, not pose any impediment to enforcing the provisions of the law, duly enacted. Moreover, the reasonableness of each notification would have to be justified by the department concerned. The learned Attorney General has been supported in his submissions
5
by Mr Aryama Sundaram, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of UIDAI and Mr Rakesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel.
6 Having due regard to the importance of the issues which have been raised in the case, which has led to the judgment of nine Judges of this Court on 24 August 20171, we are of the considered view that the resolution of the issues raised before the Court should proceed at the earliest, after the Court reassembles in January 2018. This will ensure clarity for citizens on the one hand and for the Union and the state governments and the instrumentalities on the other hand.
7 Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as the learned Attorney General for India and all the other counsel supporting his submissions have agreed to the suggestion of the Court that the final hearing of the case commence on 17 January 2018. We direct accordingly.
8 The matter which needs consideration in the meantime is the interim arrangement which should govern the field.
9 The learned Attorney General for India has stated that :
1 (201 7) 1 0 SCC 1
6
(i) The Union government has extended the deadline for Aadhaar linkage with all schemes of its Ministries/Departments until 31 March 2018;
(ii) As far as Aadhaar linkage with bank accounts is concerned, for existing bank accounts, the last date for the completion of the process may be extended to 31 March 2018;
(iii) In so far as new bank accounts are concerned, while the last date for completing the process of Aadhaar linking may be extended until 31 March 2018, persons desirous to open new accounts shall produce proof to the bank of an application having been submitted for obtaining an Aadhaar card together with the application number which shall be supplied to the account opening bank; and
(iv) As regards Aadhaar based E-KYC for mobile phone subscribers, as held by a Bench of two learned Judges of this Court by its order dated 6 February 2017 in
Lokniti Foundation v. Union of India and Another2, the process of completing the E-KYC process is to be completed by 6 February 2018. The Union government informs the Court, that consistent with the extension of the deadline to 31 March 2018 in other cases, this Court may consider passing appropriate orders.
10 In terms of (i) and (ii) above, we accept the statement of the learned Attorney General for India and order accordingly.
2 (2 017) 7 SCC 155
7
11 In terms of (iii) above, subject to the submission of the details in regard to the filing of an application for an Aadhaar card and the furnishing of the application number to the account opening bank, we likewise extend the last date for the completion of the process of Aadhaar linking of new bank accounts to 31 March 2018.
12 In terms of (iv) above we extend the date for the completion of the E-KYC process in respect of mobile phone subscribers until 31 March 2018.
13 Consistent with the above directions, we also direct that the extension of the last date for Aadhar linkage to 31 March 2018 shall apply, besides the schemes of the Ministries/Departments of the Union government to all state governments in similar terms. As a consequence of the extension of the deadline to 31 March 2018, it is ordered accordingly.
14 We also clarify that in so far as the provisions of Section 139 AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are concerned, the matter stands governed by the judgment of this Court in Binoy Visman v. Union of India3.
3 Writ Petition (C ) No 247 of 2017
8
15 The above arrangement shall continue to operate pending the disposal of the proceedings before the Constitution Bench.
16 The Registry shall list the entire batch of connected cases for final hearing on 17 January 2018.
..….....................................CJI
[DIPAK MISRA]
…........................................J
[A. K. SIKRI]
…........................................J
[A.M. KHANWILKAR]
…........................................J [Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD]
…….....................................J
[ASHOK BHUSHAN]
New Delhi December 15, 2017
9
ITEM NO.501 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494/2012 JUSTICE K.S.PUTTASWAMY(RETD) & ANR. Petitioners
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondents
WITH
T.C.(C) No. 151/2013 (XVI-A) T.C.(C) No. 152/2013 (XVI-A) W.P.(C) No. 833/2013 (PIL-W) W.P.(C) No. 829/2013 (PIL-W) T.P.(C) No. 1797/2013 (XVI -A) W.P.(C) No. 932/2013 (PIL-W) T.P.(C) No. 1796/2013 (XVI-A) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 144/2014 In W.P.(C) No. 494/2012 (PIL-W) T.P.(C) No. 313/2014 (XVI -A)
T.P.(C) No. 312/2014 (XVI -A)
SLP(Crl) No. 2524/2014 (II-A)
W.P.(C) No. 37/2015 (PIL-W)
W.P.(C) No. 220/2015 (PIL-W)
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 674/2015 In W.P.(C) No. 829/2013 (PIL-W) T.P.(C) No. 921/2015 (XVI -A)
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 470/2015 In W.P.(C) No. 494/2012 (PIL-W) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 444/2016 In W.P.(C) No. 494/2012 (PIL-W) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 608/2016 In W.P.(C) No. 494/2012 (PIL-W) W.P.(C) No. 797/2016 (PIL-W)
(FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES ON IA 4/2016, FOR DIRECTIONS ON IA 5/2017 and FOR STAY APPLICATION ON IA 6/2017)
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 844/2017 In W.P.(C) No. 494/2012 (PIL-W) W.P.(C) No. 342/2017 (PIL-W)
(FOR INTERIM PRAYERS FOR GRANT OF INTERIM RELIEF ON IA 1/2017, IA No. 129017/2017-impleading party, IA No.129021/2017- CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No.129027/2017-impleading party, and IA No.129032/2017-CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION)
W.P.(C) No. 372/2017 (X)
W.P.(C) No. 1058/2017 (PIL-W)
W.P.(C) No. 966/2017 (PIL-W)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.102155/2017-GRANT OF INTERIM RELIEF) W.P.(C) No. 1014/2017 (PIL-W)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.107091/2017-GRANT OF INTERIM RELIEF and IA No.122999/2017-impleading party)
W.P.(C) No. 1002/2017 (PIL-W)
W.P.(C) No. 1056/2017 (X)
Date : 15-12-2017 This matter was called on for pronouncement of
10
Order today. For Petitioners Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. Mr. Jaideep Singh, Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati Mr. T. Gopal, Adv.
Mr. Amit Verma, Adv.
Ms. Tanuja Patra, Adv.
Ms. Ritu Apurva, Adv.
Ms. Drishti Singh Rathore, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv. Mr. Jaideep Singh, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, AOR Mr. Talha Abdul Rahman, Adv. Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Prateek Chadha, Adv. Mr. Jayavardhan Singh, Adv. Mr. Pavan Bhushan, Adv. Mr. Vivek Raja, Adv. Mr. Hitesh, Adv. Mr. Anand Grover, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Prasana S., Adv. Ms. N. Srinidhi Rao, Adv. Ms. Stuti Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, AOR Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Prasanna S., Adv. Ms. Samiksha Godiyal, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vipin Nair, Adv. Mr. P.B. Suresh, Adv. Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Mr. S. Prasanna, Adv. Ms. Samiksha Godiyal, Adv. Mr. Prithu Garg, Adv. Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Govind Manoharan, Adv. Mr. Vipin Nair, AOR Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Vrinda Bhandari, Adv.
11
Mr. N. Sai Vinod, Adv. Mr. T.V.S. Raghavendra Sreyas, AOR Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prasanna S., Adv.
Mr. Apar Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Deepayan Mandal, AOR Mr. Koshy John, Adv.
Ms. Pragya Baghel, Adv.
Ms. Anusha Natrajan, Adv. Ms. Samten Doma, Adv.
Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rahul Narayan, AOR Mr. Apar Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Annanya Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Goel, Adv. Mr. Gautam Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Bhawna, Adv. Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv. Mr. Anish Kumar Gupta, AOR Mr. Avdhesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. R.K. Rajwanshi, Adv. Mr. Chandra Shekhar Suman, Adv. Ms. Deep Shikha Bharti, Adv. Ms. Rita Gupta, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co, AOR M/s. Meharia & Company, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Abhishek Atrey, AOR Mr. Shadan Farasat, AOR Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR Mrs. Geetha Kovilan, AOR Mr. Pranaya Kumar Mohapatra, AOR For Respondents/
Applicants Mr. K.K. Venugopal, AG Mr. Zoheb Hossain, AOR
Ma. Ankur Talwar, Adv.
Mr. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Hemantika Wahi, AOR Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv. Ms. Shodhika Sharma, Adv. Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, AOR
12
Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Jugal Kishore Gilda, Adv. Gen. Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
Dr. Lalit Bhasin, Adv.
Ms. Nina Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Mudit Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Palak Chadha, Adv.
Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv. Ms. Simran Jeet, Adv.
M/s. Arputham Aruna & Co., AOR Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv. Mr. Wills Mathews, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Adv. Mr. Biju P. Raman, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Bhavuk Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Edward Belho, AAG, Nagaland Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Adv. Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv. Mrs. G. Indira, AOR Mr. Jayesh Gaurav, Adv. Mr. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, AOR Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhanan, Adv. Ms. Nitya Madhusoodhanan, Adv. Mr. T.G.N. Nari, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Rana, Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Bhagirath N. Patel, Adv.
13
Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Mansi Gupta, Adv. Mr. Moazzam Ali, Adv. Mr. Wazer Singh Malik, Adv. Dr. Mrs. Vipin Gupta, AOR Mr. Anish Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. B.V. Gadnis, Adv. Mr. V. Gadnis, Adv. Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv. Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. S. Sharma, Adv. Mr. Biju P. Raman, adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Soumitra G. Chaudhuri, Adv. Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, AOR Mr. Karan Bharihoke, Adv. Mr. K.V. Vijayakumar, AOR Ms. Maitreyee Mishra, Adv. Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Mohd. Waquas, Adv. Mr. P.K. Singh, Adv.
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, AOR Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Adv. Mr. Ajay Bansal, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, AOR Mr. Dipesh Sinha, Adv. Ms. Ayiala Imti, Adv. Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, AOR Ms. Fauzia Shakil, Adv. Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Adv. Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan, Adv. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, AAG, Rajasthan Mr. Lalitendu Mohapatra, Adv. Mr. Shrey Kapoor, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR
Mr. Leishangthem Roshmani Kh., AOR Ms. Maibam Babina, Adv.
14
Mr. Kuldeep S. Parihar, Adv. Mr. H.S. Parihar, AOR Mr. Anil Grover, AAG, Haryana Mr. Satish Kumar, Adv. Ms. Noopur Singhal, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kr. Visen, AOR Mr. J.S. Attri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Chandra Nand Jha, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Mansi Kapur, Adv. Ms. Megha Karnwal, Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, Adv. Mrs. Bihu Sharma, Adv. Ms. Purnima Krishna, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Garg, Adv. Mr. V.G. Pragasam, AOR/AAG, Puducherry Mr. S. Prabu Ramasubramani, Adv. Mr. S. Manuraj, Adv.
Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv. Ms. Parul Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Priyadarshi Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Pratibhanu S.K., Adv. Mr. Saransh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Saransh Jain, Adv. Mr. Meka Venkatarama Krishna, Adv. Mr. R. Sudhinder, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Amrita Sarkar, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nipun Saxena, Adv.
Ms. Pallavi Pratap, AOR
M/s. Lawyer S Knit & Co, AOR M/s. Meharia & Company, AOR Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, AOR Mr. Dinkar Kalra, AOR
15
Ms. Rashmi Singhania, AOR Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, AOR Ms. Savita Singh, AOR Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. T.G. Narayanan Nair, AOR
Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, AOR Mr. Mishra Saurabh, AOR
Mr. Manish Vashishtha, AOR
Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR
M/s. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR M/s. Corporate Law Group, AOR Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Mr. Harish Pandey, AOR
Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. Anip Sachthey, AOR
Ms. Anitha Shenoy, AOR
Intervenor-in-person, AOR
Applicant-in-person, AOR
Mr. Jogy Scaria, AOR
M/s. Khaitan & Co., AOR
Mr. Harsh Kaushik, AOR
Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR
Hon'ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud pronounced the order of the Bench comprising Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri, Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan.
In terms of the signed reportable order, certain directions are issued. The arrangement as per the directions issued shall continue to operate pending the disposal of the proceedings before the Constitution Bench. Let the entire batch of connected cases be listed for final hearing on 17.1.2018.
(Deepak Guglani) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Assistant Registrar
(Signed reportable order is placed on the file)
Alert