Firecrackers

They said firecracker manufacturers can be deprived of their right to do business based on statements which were not supported by facts.

On October 9 last year, the top court temporarily banned the sale of firecrackers ahead of Diwali in the Delhi-NCR region.

The court refused to relax its order while dismissing a plea by traders who had sought permission to sell crackers for at least a day or two before Diwali on October 19, 2017.

The apex court said its ban order during Diwali last year was an experiment to examine its effect on pollution levels in the region. his government would like the leaders of the two sides to resolve all disputes, including the “core issue” of Kashmir, through talks. Speaking at the summit, which is the brainchild of Saudi Crown PrinceMohammedbinSalmanto attract foreign investment into the kingdom, Khan said that his government is approaching the IMF and the friendly countries to seek loans to plug the financial gap.

The three-day summit, nicknamed “Davos in the desert”, has been overshadowed by raging global outrage over the murder of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2.

Several investors and international figureheads have cancelled their plans to attend the summit in an apparent protest against the killing of Khashoggi.

International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin have also pulled out. Khan, who attended the summit, is visiting close ally Saudi Arabia for the second time since assuming power in August. taken under that circular, he said. “I would say that if the SC were to order someone to delete data that has been collected, then that would be one thing. On the other hand, to keep data when there is no clear direction to that effect may not also be correct. Since this aspect has not been deliberated upon, and is one that is quite significant for public interest, a clarification must be sought from the court,” Sengupta added.

“In the silence of the majority, you can’t say this one aspect of the minority could plug this void. That’s a wrong way to read the judgment.”

Telcos don’t have to delete Aadhaar data: Rahul Matthan

Reading the text of the judgment closely, Rahul Matthan, a partner-lawyer in technology and media practice at the law firm Trilegal, and author of Privacy 3.0., said, “I don’t think telcos need to delete Aadhaar data. The majority opinion is the operational part of the judgment. Justice Chandrachud wrote the dissent and so what he said cannot alter the operational part of the judgment.”

“One argument being used is that when the minority concurs with the majority on an issue, anything additional it says on that point amplifies the majority. The majority says Aadhaar should not be linked to mobile numbers and because the dissent not only agrees with this but goes further and asks for Aadhaar data to be deleted, some are arguing that telecom data should be deleted. I disagree. A dissent cannot be a partial dissent. Justice Chandrachud disagrees with the majority and has recorded his views without any attempt to impose them on the majority. We have to respect that and trust that if the majority had agreed they would have reflected his views in the operational judgment,” Matthan said.

Matthan also highlighted some of the gaps in the judgment. “In reading down section 57, the judgment has only said that private companies cannot use the authentication system. Nowhere has it said that data previously collected by them must be deleted. In fact, in para 367, they say that a person may use his Aadhaar card voluntarily as a proof of identity. Justice Chandrachud is the only one who speaks of deletion and even he only speaks of it in the context of telcos. Nothing has been mentioned in the context of banks or anything else.”

There is no positive obligation on telcos to delete: Zoheb Hosain

“There is no positive obligation on telcos to delete the Aadhaar data. If the court has intended for the data to be deleted, then there would be suitable directions to that effect. Usually there is something known as judicial conference. There is a presumption that judges have read each other’s judgment even though they may not say so explicitly. And under this presumption, if the majority judgment has not reiterated the views of Justice Chandrachud, then it can be presumed that directions of the minority view cannot be construed as the law declared by the SC,” Zoheb Hosain, a lawyer for UIDAI in the SC case, said.

Deletion only on request: Govt and Industry bodies

The Unique Identification Authority Of India (UIDAI), the department of telecommunications and the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), an industry body of mobile service bodies, have all said telcos will not delete data unless requested by the customer.

“The Honourable Supreme Court in its judgment in Aadhaar case has nowhere directed that the mobile number which has been issued through Aadhaar eKYC has to be disconnected. If anybody wishes to get her/his Aadhaar eKYC replaced by the fresh KYC, s/he may request the service provider for delinking of her/his Aadhaar by submitting fresh OVDs as per earlier DoT Circulars on mobile KYC,” UIDAI said in a joint statement with the department of telecommunications last week.

Meanwhile, COAI has confirmed that telcos would not be deleting Aadhaar data unless specifically requested for.