Supreme Court to examine constitutional validity of bill

The SC on Tuesday decided to examine the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar law passed by Parliament as a money bill. A three-judge bench of Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justices R. Banumathi and Uday Lalit told senior counsel P. Chidambaram and Kapil Sibal appearing for Congress MP Jairam Ramesh, who had challenged the Aadhaar law and sought a declaration, that it is unconstitutional and not valid.

At the outset attorney-general Mukul Rohatgi for the Centre submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable as the decision of the Speaker to certify a particular bill as a “money bill” is not subject to judicial review. He said there are a number of judgments which hold that the Speaker’s decision in this regard is final.

Mr Chidambaram, however, said the Aadhaar law ought not to have been passed as a money bill. The attempt to pass it as a money bill is a colourable exercise of power. When the CJI wanted to know in what manner the fundamental rights of the petitioner had been affected, Mr Chidambaram said when Parliament violates rule of law and there is gross transgression, the court can interfere.

Counsel submitted that both the Lok Sabha and RS are equal. While so, how can one House be deprived of its right as, if it is a money bill, once it is passed in the Lok Sabha, the Rajya Sabha can only make recommendations which are not mandatory to be accepted by LS. When the Aadhaar Bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha after it was passed in the LS, the members voiced their protest and six amendments were suggested but not accepted.

This is too grave and serious a matter which cannot be thrown out on the grounds of locus or maintainability. When there is procedural irregularity the court cannot go into that question, but when there is procedural illegality, the court can go into its validity, he argued.

The bench asked both Mr Chidambaram and the A-G to give a brief note of their submissions so that the court can consider them on the next date of hearing on July 20. In his petition Mr Jairam Ramesh said the introduction of the Aadhaar Bill as a money bill is nothing but a brazen and mala fide attempt to bypass the approval of the Rajya Sabha, which holds an important place in the constitutional and democratic framework of law-making.

He said the writ petition raises important questions of law which need consideration by this court, viz whether the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill, 2016, introduced in the Lok Sabha on 03.03.2016 (which has now become an act), could be characterised as a “money bill” in accordance with Article 110 of the Constitution; whether the Aadhaar Act clearly contains a substantial number of provisions that do not pertain to any of the matters enumerated in sub-clauses (a) to (f) of Article 110(1) or any matters incidental thereto, as per sub-clause (g) of Article 110(1), thereby taking the Aadhaar Act outside the ambit of a “Money Bill”; whether the Aadhaar Act was in the nature of an ordinary “financial bill” subject to the provisions of Article 117 of the Constitution that requires approval of both, the Lok Sabha as well as the Rajya Sabha, in order to become law; and whether the present case in view of the deliberate attempt to bypass the approval of the Rajya Sabha by introducing an ordinary financial bill as a “money bill” is a blatant constitutional fraud being played on the democratic process of law-making