Summary
By a four-to-one majority, the Court dismissed review petitions against the Aadhaar Constitution Bench judgment of 26 September 2018 and refused open-court or personal hearing. It held that no review case was made out and that a change in law or later coordinate- or larger-Bench judgment alone is not a review ground. Chandrachud J. dissented, favouring deferral until the larger-Bench reference on Money Bills in Rojer Mathew was decided.
Issues
- Whether grounds existed to review the Aadhaar judgment, and whether the pending larger-Bench Money Bill reference warranted keeping the petitions pending.
Held
- Majority: no case for reviewing the judgment and order dated 26 September 2018 was established. A change in law or subsequent decision of a coordinate or larger Bench by itself cannot constitute a ground for review. (¶ Majority order, paragraph 4)
- Majority: permission to file was granted and delay condoned, but open-court/personal hearing and the request to urge additional grounds in Review Petition (Civil) No.22 of 2019 were rejected. (¶ Majority order, paragraphs 1–5)
- Dissent, Chandrachud J.: the petitions pre-dated Rojer Mathew and remained pending when that coordinate Constitution Bench doubted the Money Bill reasoning and referred issues to a larger Bench. Consistency, judicial discipline and the ends of justice required keeping the reviews pending for that determination. This proposed deferral was not the Court’s operative disposition. (¶ Dissent, paragraphs 9–14)
Result
Review petitions dismissed by majority; additional-ground request rejected. Chandrachud J. dissented in favour of awaiting the larger-Bench reference.