Retired High Court judge K.S. Puttaswamy, the original petitioner whose plea on Aadhaar led to the setting up of the Constitution Bench in the Supreme Court, welcomed parts of the verdict , particularly those connected with protecting data from private firms and the striking down of its requirement for school and college admissions.
“I have not read the majority or minority judgment fully... But, it is correct that they have removed sections where private companies could use our details. Why should we give it to them? The state can use it to an extent,” said the 92-year-old from his home.
He had approached the apex court in 2013 claiming that Aadhaar violates a person’s right to privacy.
Mr. Puttaswamy said that only a full reading of the judgment can throw some light on why the Supreme Court upheld the passage of the Aadhaar Act as a Money Billby the current NDA government. “I have my own doubts whether or not this can be a Money bill, but if the majority has said so, it shall remain like this... Sometimes, the minority judgment may be correct, but the majority opinion will prevail,” he said, when asked about Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s dissent calling Aadhaar unconstitutional.
While the judgement states that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory in schools and university, it has been made mandatory for PAN and IT filing. “I don’t see anything wrong in this. Very small percentage of people will be affected and I don’t foresee any issue with the details given,” said Mr. Puttaswamy.
