9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y upheld and the impugned Circular only seeks to implement Section 139AA, we decline any interim relief as prayed for by the Petitioner. Petitioner had instituted a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, raising issues identical to those raised in the present petition. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed this petition by order dated 10 November 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shekhar Pandey, Mr. P. Kedia and Mr. Mohit Kumar Sharma i/b. Agoma Law Associates. For the Respondent No. 5: Ms. Rinky Valanju a/w Mr. Hemant Dharap i/b. R. V. Legal. PC.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Mr. Joshi waives service on behalf of Respondent No. 2 and Ms. Valanju waives service on behalf of Respondent No. 5. 3. The Petitioner will have to serve the other Resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Binoy Viswam vs. Union of India & Ors. (2007) 7 S.C.R. Page 1. The limited interim reliefs granted in paragraph 125 of Binoy Viswam (supra) were pending the challenge to the Aadhaar scheme. The constitutional validity of the Aadhaar scheme was also upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K. S. Puttaswamy (Aadhaar-5J) vs. Union of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present case are distinguishable. 9. At least prima facie, we cannot accept the above distinction. Considering that the vires of Section 139AA of the said Act is already upheld and the impugned Circular only seeks to implement Section 139AA, we decline any interim relief as prayed for by the Petitioner. 10. Further, we note that the Petitioner had instituted a petition under Article 32 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
