Print Friendly, PDF & Email

13 OCTOBER, 2017 (MAINS)


Q1. Was the recent decision regarding the labelling of the Aadhar bill as a money bill a legally and morally correct step? Examine in context of the recent passing of the Aadhar bill and its constitutional validity.


Please write the answer in comments section

  • Osho Korde

    The constitution defines those bills as Money bills under Art 110 which contains provisions related to regulation of taxation, money withdrawal from consolidated fund of India etc. Any bill that contains matter beyond the scope of these provision are treated as an ordinary bill. A money bill enjoy certain privileges during its passage such that the role of Rajya sabha is restricted and it can’t be rejected by The president.

    However it is argued that Aadhaar Act is against the text of Constitution on two claims – 1) Whether its treatment as money bill is correct 2) Whether decision of speaker is final.
    Key points against characterization as money bill are –
    1) Aadhaar act provides statutory backing to a process of withdrawing money and not sanctions withdrawal. It argued whether the Aadhaar Card can be considered as a money bill issue.
    2) Aadhaar mandates creation of citizen’s database which falls outside ambit of Article 110 and needs ordinary bill sanction. IT is against Article 21 which provide freedom of privacy to all citizens
    3) Aadhaar act constraints ability of Rajya Sabha to amend the bill as being the voice of states it is an important part of the discussion
    4) SC Judgement on Speakers’ decision outside judicial review to be seen basis the database creation and other rights which are being infringed
    Therefore it can be said that due consideration and deliberation should have been provided to both the houses before this Act was passed even though benefit from it are immense towards digital society. It should have been passed as an ordinary bill to voice in opinions of the Rajya Sabha in this crucial legislation.