Delhi High Court grants center more time to file response

The Delhi High Court today granted additional time for the central government to file its counter affidavit in the PIL seeking to link the ownership documents to the Aadhaar card.

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Judge Navin Chawla has now set the case for a hearing on September 14. An opinion on the subject was published in July 2019.

Filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, the petition requests instructions to be issued to the central government as well as the Delhi government to take appropriate action to link citizens’ movable and immovable property documents to their Aadhaar number in order to fight against corruption, generation of black money and benami transaction. .

The petitioner argued that the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 cannot be guaranteed and that the golden goals, set forth in the preamble, cannot be achieved without curbing corruption and the benami deal. Therefore, it is the duty of the state to take appropriate measures to fight corruption and seize the properties of the benami.

The petitioner believes that linking ownership documents to Aadhaar will help in the fight against corruption, as black money holders would be forced to declare their movable and immovable property unaudited and it will take years to generate that amount of benami property again . He also cited reports from various organizations such as Transparency International to show how benami dealings lead to rampant corruption and the dismantling of the efficient public distribution system.

As today every citizen of our country has an Aadhaar number, asking them to link it to their property documents is a better option. The main advantage of this strategy is that the tax authorities will immediately obtain information about the “legal owners”,‘ reads the plea.

He adds that once the Aadhaar link occurs, the tax authorities can approach the “legal owners” and it can be treated as benami property if the “legal owners” are unaware or deny knowledge of the property. “. Even if the “legal owner” takes charge and claims that it is his property, he must show the “source of income” for the purchase of this property.

Case title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Indian Union & Anr.

Harry D. Gonzalez