Madras High Court Dismisses PIL Against Insistence On Aadhaar Authentication With Electricity Connection

The Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation challenging a Government Order issued by the Energy Department permitting Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (Tangedco) to insist on linkage of Aadhaar number with electricity consumption consumer billing number for availing certain services. 

The bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy dismissed the petition observing that the same was devoid of merits. 

The court relied on the decision of the Apex Court in KS Puttaswamy wherein it was held that Adhaar authentication can be insisted upon for welfare schemes under which the benefits, subsidies, or services are provided to intended recipients. The court noted as under,

Thus, when the Aadhaar authentication is required from such persons who want to avail the benefits under the Schemes and such schemes being social welfare schemes to be paid out of the Consolidated Fund of the State, there is no illegality whatsoever in the impugned Government Order warranting interference by this court in this public interest litigation.

The petitioner filed by Advocate ML Ravi, president of Desiya Makkal Sakthi Katchi stated that such insistence on linking of Aadhaar number causes great confusion and that the decision was taken without proper approval from the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission. The petitioner had also submitted that such insistence on Aadhaar affected Non-resident Indians as they had properties in the state but may not be possessing Aadhaar cards. 

The state had countered these submissions by stating that the decision was taken after getting necessary approval from all the nodal agencies. It also submitted before the court that as per the notification, the consumers who did not possess an aadhaar card could also submit their bank passbooks, Voter ID card, ration card, PAN Card, passport or even driving license. 

However, the petitioner submitted that the permission for submitting alternative documents was not being publicised and that TANGEDCO continued to insist on providing the Aadhaar numbers. 

Case Title: ML Ravi v. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 515

Case No: WP 32564 of 2022