The Delhi High Court refused to direct linking of Aadhaar with property documents of citizens.

The Court said that the exercise of linking Aadhar cards with property transactions falls within the realm of policy-making and is, therefore, beyond the scope of judicial intervention.

The Court emphasized that judicial review would only be applicable once a policy is framed and implemented by the executive.

The Bench comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia observed, “We are of the considered view that the exercise of linking Aadhar Cards with transactions related to property – movable as well as immovable, basically falls in the domain of policy making and consequently, beyond the scope of judicial intervention. It is only once a policy is framed and/or acted upon by the executive that the decision would be open to judicial scrutiny”.

Standing Counsel Manish Mohan appeared for the Union, Standing Counsel Santosh Kumar Tripathi appeared for the State and Senior Standing Counsel Shlok Chandra appeared for the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).

The Petitioner, a practising advocate, approached the High Court by way of a Writ Petition seeking directions against the Union of India and the Government of NCT of Delhi. The Petitioner contended that linking Aadhar Cards to transaction documents for movable and immovable property would combat corruption, black money generation, and improve governance.

The Court noted that the act of linking Aadhar Cards with property transactions, whether movable or immovable, is a matter of policy-making and falls outside the purview of judicial intervention. Furthermore, the Bench observed that judicial scrutiny would only be applicable once a policy is formulated and implemented by the executive

The Court issued the following directions: Firstly, the Respondents were instructed to consider the petition as part of the petitioner's representation and deliberate on it. Secondly, after necessary deliberations, involving the petitioner and other stakeholders, including potential public consultation, the Respondents should dispose of the matter within eight weeks of receiving a copy of this order.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v Union Of India & Anr. (2023:DHC:9276)

Click here to read/download Judgment