Business Standard

Aadhaar not mandatory for NEET exam: SC

IANS  |  New Delhi 

The on Wednesday said the Central Board of Secondary (CBSE) will not insist on Aadhaar-only identification for and other all-examinations.

A five-judge bench, headed by Dipak Misra, said this while referring to an earlier order by which the government had undertaken that it will not insist on Aadhaar-only identification till the top court decides on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of

The court said that will upload the necessary information on their website so that students are not affected.

Besides Misra, other judges on the bench are Justice A. K. Sikri, Justice A. M. Khanwilkar, Justic D.

Y. Chandrachud and Justice

The court order came on a plea by a resident who has challenged the circular mandating Aadhaar-only identity for those appearing for National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) examination for undergraduate medical courses: MBBS and Bachelor of Dental Surgery.

Abid Ali Yusuf Bhai Patel's niece is a aspirant and the last date of filing the form is Friday (March 9).

Besides Aadhaar, the candidates for exams can furnish their passport, voter ID or driving licence, or ration card or give their number as proof of identity.

Explaining the rationale behind asking for identity for enrolment of students appearing for or other all-examination, said it was to curb large-scale impersonation.

However, the said the students, who intended to register for examination and any other all-examination, need not necessarily produce the Aadhar number for the present.

They may be asked to produce any alternative identification number, such as ration card, passport, voter ID, driving licence or bank account, AG said.

The Unique Identification Authority of told the bench that it has not asked the Central Board of Secondary to insist on for student aspiring to appear for under-graduate entrance examinations.

The hearing saw Justice Chandrachud telling the Centre that the deadline on linking of with various schemes including bank accounts, Income Tax Returns concerned the entire financial system and people could not live in uncertainty over extension of deadline.

"You cannot wait till March 27 to extend the deadline," Justice Chandrachud said suggesting that it can be done on March 14.

At this, Justice Sikri said that since "his (Justice Chandrachud)" has unwittingly mentioned March 14, the extension of deadline would be done on that day only.

Appearing for Rajya Sabha member Jairam Ramesh, who has challenged the introduction of the Bill, 2016 (now an Act), as Money Bill, told the bench that Article 110 of the defines a Money Bill and spells the category of legislations that can be introduced as Money Bill.

Act, 2016, as it is commonly known as, is 'The (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.

Chidambaram told the court that only those bills meeting the requirements specified under sub-clause (a) to (f) of clause (1) of Article 110 of the can be introduced as Money Bill.

He also referred to Article 110(1)(e) which says that any matter which is incidental to any of the matters specified in sub-clauses (a) to (f) too can be introduced as Money Bill.

Telling the court that Bill does not meet the requirements specified under sub-clause (a) to (f) and is not incidental to them, Chidambaram said that Money Bill derogates the powers of Rajya Sabha to vote on it and can only make recommendation which Lok Sabha may or may not accept.

Addressing the contention that Speaker's decision to allow a bill to be introduced as Money Bill could not be questioned in the courts, Chidambaram took the court through various provisions of the to assert that the top court can always examine the correctness of a decision by the

Chidambaram will continue with his arguments on March 13.

--IANS

pk/qd/dg

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

First Published: Wed, March 07 2018. 19:44 IST
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU