- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Madras HC tells teacher who Challenged Biometric Attendance System to get Aadhaar else Leave the Job
The Madras High Court, while rejecting a plea of a teacher challenging the introduction of Aadhaar Enabled Biometric Attendance System in government schools, ruled, “The Writ Petitioner cannot say that she cannot be compelled to get an Aadhaar Number for the purpose of attending the School.”The HC asked R Annal, a teacher in a government high school, to either enrol herself to Aadhaar...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Madras High Court, while rejecting a plea of a teacher challenging the introduction of Aadhaar Enabled Biometric Attendance System in government schools, ruled, “The Writ Petitioner cannot say that she cannot be compelled to get an Aadhaar Number for the purpose of attending the School.”
The HC asked R Annal, a teacher in a government high school, to either enrol herself to Aadhaar or leave the service.
Annal had challenged the implementation of the Aadhar Enabled Biometric Attendance System for Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff in Government and Government Aided High Schools or Higher Secondary Schools across Tamil Nadu.
She had not enrolled herself under Aadhaar as the same was not mandatory, she said.
The mandatory implementation of the Aadhar Enabled Biometric Attendance System directly contravenes the Constitution bench judgment in the Aadhaar case, she claimed.
Collecting individual particulars and identification as far as Government servants were concerned, could not be construed as violation of the Fundamental Rights ensured under the Constitution of India, Justice SM Subramaniam observed.
The constitution bench judgment would not be applicable in this case, as the petitioner, a public servant, was governed by the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Service Rules, the court also said.
While accepting the offer of appointment, public servants made a declaration that they will abide by the Service Rules and other conditions imposed by the Government of Tamil Nadu for the betterment of the Administration, the court added.