The Calcutta High Court on Thursday heard arguments concerning whether an Aadhaar number constitutes proof of citizenship or domicile. Senior counsel Laxmi Gupta, representing the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), argued that it does not, citing the Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Act.
Read More: Last chance to lock in LOW NAV for Bluechip Pension Fund! Don’t miss out on golden years!
Gupta contended that an Aadhaar card is meant for residents staying in India for at least 182 days, primarily to facilitate targeted government subsidies.
According to the TOI reports, the case was brought forward by the Joint Forum against NRC, which aimed to strike down regulation 28A of the Aadhaar Act, 2023.
This regulation specifically addresses foreign nationals. Gupta explained that UIDAI has the authority to deactivate the Aadhaar card of any foreign national overstaying in the country after their visa expires.
“There is confusion and contradiction in statements of Union ministers. A letter from the CMO has been sent to the PMO on this issue and a member of the Rajya Sabha from Bengal has also taken up the matter with Centre. The UIDAI initially said it was a technical error,” said Forum counsel Jhuma Sen.
The UIDAI’s counsel asserted that the petition is not maintainable, as it pertains to individuals who are not Indian citizens. She added that UIDAI, upon receiving inputs from passport authorities or other relevant bodies, may conduct an inquiry into individuals’ documents under regulation 29.
Read More: SBI agri loan: Public lender announces new digital payment features and loans on YONO app
Sen argued that regulation 28A should be struck down. “Regulation 28A, when read with the following regulation 29, becomes diabolical. This is back-door NRC. This is a colourable exercise of power,” she stated.
She further pointed out that a single bench of the High Court had previously stayed an Aadhaar card deactivation. Additional Solicitor General Ashoke Kumar Chakraborty countered that the PIL was not maintainable because it did not challenge section 54 of the Aadhaar Act, from which the regulations derive. Chakraborty questioned whether a petitioner could challenge a country’s sovereignty.
Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam cited a recent case involving a foreign national residing in Ballygunge. This individual, who had an Aadhaar card and filed income tax returns, acquired 11 properties in West Bengal.
The division bench, also comprising Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, has scheduled the next hearing for July 11.
