The panel had been set up on July 31 following the government’s decision to make Aadhaar compulsory for all its services.
The court said the final hearing in all Aadhaar-related issues would start before another bench in the last week of November.
The petitioners argued that people were being denied access to basic needs such as food and adequate nutrition, midday meals in schools, rehabilitation benefits due to bonded labourers.
A bench, comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A. M. Khanwilkar and D. Y. Chandrachud, said the larger bench would commence hearing on these petitions in the last week of November this year.
Arguing that the state’s petition violates the federal structure, the court said the chief minister could file the petition as an individual.
Former attorney general Mukul Rohatgi talks about the recent right to privacy judgment, his objections to it, paranoia surrounding the Aadhaar and more.
“I did not mean that, that privacy is nothing. I only placed the position of the Supreme Court judgements.”
The Supreme Court has said that now that the deadline has been extended, it will hear a batch of Aadhaar-related petitions in November.
The judgment will, however, allow citizens to legally challenge any government action deemed as a violation of privacy.
Does the right to privacy becoming a fundamental right mean the Aadhaar programme is unconstitutional or will be shut down? The Wire explains.
The ruling will be important not just for the immediate Aadhaar case but also numerous other matters to do with state intrusions, decisional autonomy and informational privacy.
While transaction costs have increased in the PDS and vulnerable people are being left out of the government pension system after Aadhaar linkage, the benefits aren’t clearly visible.
In attorney general Mukul Rohatgi’s arguments in favour of Aadhaar, the body is reduced to its exchange value.