Two review petitioners in the Aadhaar case have filed an application seeking open court hearing of the case.The application has been referred to the observations made by the Constitution Bench in the case Rojer Mathew v South Indian Bank, doubting the correctness of the Constitution Bench judgment delivered on September 27, 2018.
In the case it was held that there was nothing wrong in passing Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other subsidies, benefits and services) Act 2016 as a ‘money bill’.
On September 27, 2018, the Constitution Bench had upheld, by 4:1 majority, the constitutionality of Aaadhar Act 2016, with Justice Chandrachud dissenting in the Aadhaar case.
On the question of it being passed as money bill, the majority upheld the contention of the Central Government that a bill can be characterized as ‘money bill’ if it incidentally covers the aspects mentioned in clauses (a) to (g) of Article 110(1) of the Constitution. The Centre contended that the Aadhaar Act has a bearing on the expenses drawn on the Consolidated Fund of India, as it is seeking to ensure that subsidies are targeted at authenticated persons.
Justice DY Chandrachud
The written submissions, drawn by Advocate Udayaditya Banerjee, settled by Senior Advocate Shyam Divan and filed by AoRVipin Nair, also makes reference to the open court hearing allowed in the Sabarimala review case. Reliance is placed on the holding of the 9-judge bench in the Sabarimala reference that questions of law can be referred to larger bench in review petitions.
On these grounds the petitioners in Aadhaar case , Shanta Sinha and another, seek open court hearing of the review.The review petitions are listed before a bench comprising CJI S A Bobde, Justices AM Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushanand L Nageshwara Rao on June 9.
Justices Ashok Bhushan, Khanwilkar and Chandrachud were present in the original Aadhaar case judgment.
Read the written submission here:
