Justice (Retd.) K.S. Puttaswamy, who became the most visible champion of privacy rights in India, passed away in Bengaluru at the age of 98 years. Late Justice Puttaswamy’s legal career started in 1952 and from then onwards, he became a shining example of the fact that once you enter the field of law, you never ever leave it behind.
From Litigator to Litigant, Late Justice K.S. Puttaswamy played varied roles in his decades-long and versatile legal career. Therefore, as a humble tribute to the departed soul, we have attempted to recapitulate some Late Justice Puttaswamy’s career highlights.
Early Life and Legal Journey1
Late Justice K.S. Puttaswamy was born on 08-02-1926 and received his education at Maharaja’s College, Mysore and Government Law College, Bangalore. He was enrolled as an Advocate on 07-01-1952 and later elevated as Additional Government Advocate in the High Court.
Late Justice Puttaswamy’s judicial career began when he was appointed as Judge of the Karnataka High Court on 28-11-1977.
After his retirement as Judge in August 1986, Late Justice Puttaswamy was appointed as the first Vice-Chairman of Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, on 01-09-1986.
Notable Judgments as Judge of Karnataka High Court
In R.B. Mutgi v. Karnataka Electricity Board, 1981 SCC OnLine Kar 404, while dealing with the issue of non-examination of certain claims vis-a-vis stepping up of pay scale by the respondent Board, K.S. Puttaswamy, J., observed that a capricious or an arbitrary action of an administrative authority is antithesis to the concept of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution.
In Mac Charles Brothers (Private) Limited v. Commercial Tax Officer, X Additional Circle, Bangalore, (1986) 63 STC 452, K.S. Puttaswamy, J., expressed his disappointment over the CTO not providing any reasons for rejecting certificate of registration for certain goods. He therefore issued the writ of Mandamus and held the rejection to be illegal and quashed the CTO’s impugned order to the extent of “building materials and stone”.
In Mohamed Samiullah v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (1986) 61 STC 107, the Full Bench of K.S. Puttaswamy, S.R Rajashekhara Murthy and S.A. Hakeem, JJ., held that Section 22 of Sales Tax Act, 1957 confers revisional powers on the Commissioner to interfere with an order made by an appellate authority under Section 20 the Act and is not void as offending Article 14 of the Constitution.
In Corporation Bank Ltd., 1980 SCC OnLine Kar 224, K.S. Puttaswamy, J., observed that every situation that arises in the day-to-day administration of justice cannot be visualised and provision made for the same by the legislature. Sec. 151 of the Code which saves the inherent powers a Court is intended to meet such situation and in exercise of the inherent powers, it is open to a Court to condone the delay in filing a Fee Certificate.
Right to Privacy and Aadhar
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) was established in 2009 with the vision and mission to empower Aadhaar number holders of India with a unique identity and a digital platform to authenticate anytime, anywhere2. The first Aadhar Card was issued in 20103. However, at that point in time, UIDAI had been set up by an executive order and lacked a legislative back up. This raised concerns about the government’s extra-legal encroachment of the rights of the citizens4. Once such concerned citizen was Late Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, who challenged Aadhar card’s validity before the Supreme Court. However, the concern was not just about the way Aadhar could be misused, the larger concern for Late Justice Puttaswamy was, Right to Privacy
Late Justice Puttaswamy contended that the right to privacy is a Fundamental Right enshrined in the Constitution.
Finally, in K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, the 9 Judge Bench of Supreme Court of India, in a historic verdict declared unanimously that, Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.
In the 547-pages long judgment, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J writing for himself and on behalf of J.S. Khehar, CJ, R.K. Agrawal and S.A. Nazeer, JJ, said that Privacy includes at its core the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, the home and sexual orientation. He added, “While the legitimate expectation of privacy may vary from the intimate zone to the private zone and from the private to the public arenas, it is important to underscore that privacy is not lost or surrendered merely because the individual is in a public place. Privacy attaches to the person since it is an essential facet of the dignity of the human being”
Eventually, in K.S. Puttaswamy (Aadhaar-5J.) v. Union of India, (2019) 1 SCC 1, in a 1448-pages detailed judgment, the 5- Judge Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and A.K. Sikri, A.M. Khanwilkar, Dr D.Y. Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, JJ., by a majority of 4:1, declared the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 to be valid and not violative of the fundamental right to privacy.
However, certain orders and/or circulars making the citing of Aadhaar number mandatory have been held unconstitutional and struck down. Justice Sikri delivered the leading opinion for CJ Dipak Misra and himself and A.M. Khanwilkar, J. While Justice Chandrachud delivered a dissenting opinion and Justice Bhushan also delivered a separate opinion in which he broadly agreed with A.K. Sikri, J.
However, the Court did acknowledge the concerns to be legitimate but held that the apprehensions cannot override the justification of the project once the justification test is satisfied.
Legacy
Late Justice K.S. Puttaswamy’s career was defined by principles, ideals and sensitivity. His career as a lawyer was defined by his persuasiveness5. During his tenure as Judge, Late Justice Puttaswamy ensured that his judgments reflected the prized judicial principles of fairness and equity.
It was his sensitivity which led him to become the first petitioner in challenging the Aadhar card scheme and raise the issue of protection of privacy. His meticulous efforts paved way for creation of a new fundamental right within the constitutional scheme and this Right to Privacy proved instrumental in many subsequent cases, such as Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1, which decriminalised consensual same-sex relationships and many more.
Late Justice K.S. Puttaswamy has left an indelible imprint on the Indian legal scene and his contributions in law will forever act as a beacon of dedication and integrity.
1. https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/newwebsite/submenujprofile.php?nid=7
2. https://uidai.gov.in/en/about-uidai/unique-identification-authority-of-india/vision-mission.html
3. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/ks-puttaswamy-aadhaar-verdict-1349652-2018-09-26
4. Supra
5. https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/justice-k-s-puttaswamy-the-92-yr-old-who-fired-the-1st-shot-in-privacy-war-117082401108_1.html