Supreme Court Rejects Aadhaar Review Petitions, Justice Chandrachud Dissents
No grounds for allowing review of the Aadhaar judgement, says Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court rejected petitions seeking a review of its 2018 judgment dismissing challenges to the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Act.
The petitions were dismissed by a 4:1 majority. Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice BR Gavai were part of the majority opinion, while Justice Chandrachud dissented.
In September 2018, a top court constitution bench had examined the challenge to the Aadhaar Act on the ground, among others, that it was incorrectly passed as a Money Bill. That challenge was rejected.
Justice Chandrachud, however, cited disagreement by a similar-strength bench. In Rojer Mathew v South Indian Bank Ltd. (challenge to provisions Finance Act, 2017), Justice Chandrachud noted, another five-judge bench, was in favour of the matter being referred to a larger bench on the following points:
What constitutes a ‘Money Bill’ under Article 110 of the constitution.
The extent of judicial review over a certification by the speaker.
The interpretation which has been placed on the provisions of the Aadhaar Act while holding the enactment to be a ‘Money Bill’.
If these review petitions are to be dismissed and the larger bench reference in Rojer Mathew were to disagree with the analysis of the majority opinion in Puttaswamy (Aadhaar), it would have serious consequences – not just for judicial discipline, but also for the ends of justice.Justice Chandrachud’s Dissenting Judgment
The majority opinion, however, did not agree. ‘’We have perused the review petitions as well as the grounds in support thereof," says the majority opinion. "In our opinion, no case for review of judgment and order dated 20.09.2018 is made out.’’
We hasten to add that change in the law or subsequent decision/judgment of a coordinate or larger bench by itself cannot be regarded as a ground for review. The review petitions are accordingly dismissedSupreme Court Majority Judgment
The petitioners now have the option to file a curative petition.