Centre Exaggerating Aadhaar Enrolment Figures, Benefits: Petitioner Tells SC [Read Rejoinder Affidavit]

Menon contended that Aadhaar was an “insecure, unreliable, unnecessary and inappropriate technology project which is being foisted with coercion on the most vulnerable section of Indians and is threatening their constitutional and legal rights and entitlements every day by denying access to several basic needs”.

A petitioner in the Aadhaar case Kalyani Sen Menon has questioned the Centre’s claim regarding the number of enrolments in the scheme and its benefits.

In a response to Centre’s counter affidavit ahead of the hearing on June 27, Menon said the figure of 115 crore given by the Centre was far exaggerated and termed it a “puffery”. “That the faulty premise of the argument of respondent for an ostensible lack of representative character is based on the number of persons who have been enrolled within the Aadhaar scheme. Herein the respondent has attempted to conflate the number of persons enrolled to argue an impossibility of exclusion. To make such an assertion it brings forth two statistics, the first being more than 95.10% of India’s entire population possesses a Aadhaar and further with 115.15 Crore enrolments Aadhaar has the widest coverage amongst citizens. It is humbly submitted such figures amount to puffery”, said the response filed through Advocate-on-Record Vipin Nair.

Justifying her argument that the whole figures were a “puffery”, the petitioner sites several grounds:

1. Aadhaar enrollment has been open to residents (a wider or at the very least a distinct class) rather than citizens for enrollment.


2. Enrollment has been done on the back of coercive measures where people have been denied or have feared disruption in entitlements until they apply or obtain Aadhaar, something that is evident from the terms of the impugned notifications themselves, which threaten disruption of essential services by a specified date as a result of failure to enroll in Aadhaar.


3. Aadhaar enrollment has been without adequate verification and in many instances the Respondent itself has stated that the enrollment has been over 110% of the recorded population in many states giving concerns as to fraud within the system; in states such as Delhi, enrollment stands in excess of 115%.


4. The basis of the percentage and the numbers includes persons who are deceased; (e) In a Right to Information response dated December 28, 2016 the Respondent itself stated that 99.9% persons who have an Aadhaar obtained it on the basis two pre-existing IDs. The Respondent stated that till 2016, when over 105.1 crore residents had enrolled, only 8,47,366 – or 0.08% – got Aadhaar through “introducer system.” Hence, the claim that Aadhaar has rather than being an instrument of exclusion instead resulted in inclusion is deeply flawed.”


5. Further, the petitioner has submitted that Aadhaar has resulted in exclusion of certain classes through enrolment and use.

“It is further submitted that here exist no reasonable class of exclusions in the notifications made under the Aadhaar Act, 2016 which are applicable to persons irrespective of disability, age or other factors. It is submitted that in the absence of any such reasonable class of exclusions Aadhaar has been made mandatory for vulnerable sections such as bonded labourers, children availing mid-day meals especially in drought prone areas; allowance, benefits and scholarships for students with disabilities.” It said.

Menon contended that Aadhaar was an “insecure, unreliable, unnecessary and inappropriate technology project which is being foisted with coercion on the most vulnerable section of Indians and is threatening their constitutional and legal rights and entitlements every day by denying access to several basic needs”.