The Supreme Court on Friday (August 18) requested what was the hurt if an individual supplied the small print of caste or sub-caste through the Bihar caste survey when a person’s knowledge was not going to be printed by the State.
A Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti on August 18 commenced listening to a batch of pleas difficult the August 1 determination of the Patna High Court which gave the go-ahead to the caste survey. Some of those petitions have claimed the train was an infringement of individuals’s proper to privateness.
Also Read | Bihar could cross legislation to finish caste-based survey: Minister Vijay Kumar Chaudhary
“If someone gives the name of his caste or sub-caste, and if that data is not published, then what is the harm. What is being sought to be released is cumulative figures. How does that affect the right to privacy? What questions (in the questionnaire prepared for the survey) do you think are contrary to Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution,” the Bench requested senior advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan, showing for NGO ‘Youth for Equality’.
The NGO is amongst numerous petitioners which have challenged the Bihar authorities’s determination to conduct a caste survey.
At the outset, senior advocate Shyam Divan, showing for the Bihar authorities, stated the caste survey was accomplished on August 6 and the info gathered uploaded by August 12.
The Bench advised Mr. Divan it isn’t issuing discover on the petitions as then the query will come up about interim aid and the listening to will get pushed again to November or December.
Senior advocate Aprajita Singh, representing one of many petitioners, stated they’re conscious that the train has been accomplished however would argue for a keep on the publication of the info.
The Bench stated it isn’t going to remain one thing except a prima facie case is made out as there’s a judgement of the High Court in favour of the State authorities.
“Whether you like it or not, the data has been uploaded,” the Bench told the counsel.
The data, which has been collected during the survey, has been uploaded on the BIJAGA (Bihar Jaati Adharit Ganana) app.
The Bench told Mr. Divan there are two things — one that individual data will not be made public and two that the cumulative data will be shared with different departments for analysis.
Mr. Divan said that’s the point if individual data is not to be released, then where is the issue.
During the hearing, Justice Khanna said unfortunately in Bihar, normally the caste of an individual is known to neighbours although such a situation does not exist in a city like Delhi.
Mr. Vadiyanathan contended a Constitution Bench of this court had in 2017 ruled that the right to privacy cannot be infringed upon except under a fair, just and reasonable law with a legitimate aim.
“There isn’t any legislation however an govt order (for caste survey) and no causes have been given and communicated in that order….What is infringed is Article 14 and 21 (proper to equality earlier than legislation and proper to life and private liberty) and a traditional govt order is not going to suffice,” he contended.
The Bench said the notification for caste survey is not a quasi-judicial order where there is a need to communicate the reason.
“This is an administrative determination, the place there is probably not a lot element for the general public,” the Bench added.
Mr. Vaidyanathan said mere notification cannot take the nature of statute or law as envisioned in the 2017 verdict in the K.S. Puttaswamy case, which dealt with the right to privacy.
“When Article 21 is sought to be invaded, it needs to be supported by a statute not a notification. Please see the questions which had been requested from the general public within the survey,” Mr. Vaidyanathan told the Bench, while referring to the questionnaire.
The Bench then asked him which questions he thought were contrary to Article 21 of the Constitution and infringed the right to privacy. Mr. Vaidyanathan responded by saying people have been asked about their gender, caste, income and answering all these questions have been made mandatory.
“Anything associated to caste is a matter of privateness. All the 17 questions are made necessary to be answered by the general public and solely the Aadhaar quantity is voluntary,” the senior lawyer said, adding that the real question is can the public be asked to furnish these details in the absence of a law.
The Bench said there was no penalty if the public does not give these details.
The Bench adjourned the hearing for August 21 after senior advocate Aprajita Singh said she needs time to make her submissions.
On August 7, the top court had refused to stay the Patna High Court’s order giving the go-ahead for the caste survey.
Besides the pleas filed by NGOs ‘Youth for Equality’ and ‘Ek Soch Ek Paryas’, another petition has been filed by Nalanda resident Akhilesh Kumar, who has contended that the notification issued by the State government for the exercise is against the constitutional mandate. There are some other petitions.
Mr. Kumar’s petition says in terms of the constitutional mandate, only the Union government is empowered to conduct a census.
The plea, filed through advocate Barun Kumar Singh, said the entire exercise of conducting a “census” by the Bihar government is without authority and legislative competence, and reeks of malafide.
The High Court had said in its 101-page verdict, “We discover the motion of the State to be completely legitimate, initiated with due competence with the authentic purpose of offering growth with justice….”
Source: www.thehindu.com
