Central Information Commission
Manoj Sharma vs Unique Identification Authority Of ... on 9 March, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140644
CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140646
CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140812
Manoj Sharma ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Unique Identification
Authority of India, ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Chandigarh
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal(s):
Sl. No. Second Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of
Appeal RTI CPIO's First FAA's Second
No. Application Reply Appeal Order Appeal
1. 140644 21.08.2024 05.09.2024 18.09.2024 03.102024 16.12.2024
2. 140646 18.09.2024 14.10.2024 11.11.2024 11.12.2024 17.12.2024
3. 140812 20.08.2024 05.09.2024 18.09.2024 03.10.2024 18.12.2024
The instant set of appeals have been clubbed for decision as these relate to similar
RTI Applications and same subject matter.
Date of Hearing: 02.03.2026
Date of Decision: 02.03.2026
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
Shri P R Ramesh
ORDER
Page 1 of 16
Second Appeal No. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140644
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:
A) Kindly provide me the certified copy by post/hand/online of the following: 1) Aadhaar No. 3273XXXXX of myself i.e. Manoj Sharma S/o Balkrishan Sharma,
2) Aadhaar registration form with all supporting documents as submitted by Aadhaar Holder on getting himself registered for said Aadhaar Number, B) Kindly also provide me the detail information of government subsidy/facility name, amount and date when the said Aadhaar No. is used and utilized for any such government subsides/facilities till date.
1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.09.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"जन सूचना अिधिनयम, 2005 के अंतगत ा आपके दो ऑनलाइन आरटीआई आवेदन प पंजीकरण सं ा UIDAI/R/E/24िदनाक 20.08.2024 तथा UIDAI/R/E/24/0िदनाक 21.08.2024 जोिक इस कायालय म मशः 20.08.202.4 तथा 23.08.2024 को ा ए ह; के संदभ म आपको सूिचत िकया जाता है िक आपके ारा वांिछत सूचना संबंिधत अनुभाग से ाम कर ली गई है , जोिक इस प के साथ प RO-CHD-27/1/2024-RO- CHD/2570 तथा RO-CHD-27/1/2024-RO-CHD/2569 िदनाक 04.09.2024 सलन है ।
िब दु सं ा
(1) आवेदक UIDAI की आिधका रक वेबसाइट पर
https://myaadhaar.uidai.gov.in/genricDownloadAadhaar िलंक पर जाकर आधार डाउनलोड कर सकते ह जो िक िनशु है , डाउनलोड करने के िलए आवेदक का मोबाइल नंबर आधार से िलंक होना आव क है डाउनलोड िकया गया ई-आधार पूण प से वैध/ना है । इसके अित र , पी.वी.सी. आधार काड भगवान के िलए Page 2 of 16 आवेदक भारतीय िविश पहचान ािधकरण की वेबसाईट https://residentpvc.uidai.gov.in/order-pvcreprint पर जाकर ऑनलाईन भी अ ाई कर सकता है । ऑनलाईन पी.वी.सी. आधार काड मंगवाने की फीस मा ₹50/- है ।
(2) इसके अलावा वां िछत सू चना के शेष भाग के िलए आवेदक का ान, आधार अिधिनयम की धारा 28(5) पर आकिषत िकया जाता है जो िक िन ानुसार है :-
"धारा 28(5): त मय वृत, िकसी अ िविध म अंतिव िकसी बात के होते ए भी और इस अिधिनयम म अ था उपबंिधत के िसवाय, ािधकरण या उसके कोई अिधकारी या अ कमचारी या कोई ऐसा अिभकरण जो िक क ीय पहचान डाटा िन ेपागार (CIDR) को बनाए रखता है , अपनी सेवा के दौरान वया उसके प ात, क ीय पहचान डाटा िन ेपागार म भंडा रत कोई सू चना या अिध माणन अिभलेख िकसी को कट नहीं करे गा:
पर ु कोई आधार सं ा धारक, ऐसी रीित से जो िविनयमों ारा िविनिद की जाए, ािधकरण से उसकी कोर बायोमे िटक सूचना को अपविजत करते ए, उसकी पहचान सूचना दे न के िलए अनुरोध कर सकता है ।"
आवेदक ारा अपेि त जानकारी क ीय पहचान डाटा िन ेपागार (CIDR) का िह ा है और इसे िकसी के साथ साझा नहीं िकया जा सकता है ।
िब दु सं ा B. वां िछत सू चना भारतीय िविश पहचान ािधकरण, े ीय कायालय,
चंडीगढ़ म उपल नहीं है।..."
1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.09.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 03.10.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
1.3. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 16.12.2024.
Page 3 of 161.4. A written submission dated 23.02.2026 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
"..6. Now, the appellant has approached Hon'ble CIC on the following grounds
a) Information and details not provided till date and within specified time.
b) Inappropriate and unjustified reasons to delay or to provide the required information Response (for a and b): The reply to RTI application dt. 21.8.2024 was provided to the applicant-appellant on 5-9-2024 and the reply to RTI Appeal dt. 18-9-2024 was provided on 3.10.2024 i.e. within the time limit prescribed in the RTI Act, 2005 and it is evident that there was no delay.
c) Direct or Indirect violation of legal heir(s) civil as well as constitutional rights which includes with others speech, expression, liberty, life etc.
d) The PIO as well as First Appellate Authority based their decision(s) on law/or/and fact which are non-relevant to the appellant's case
e) The absence of accountability and transparency existed in the functioning of public authority which leading to anarchy in dealings of citizens related and relevant information/data.
Response (for c. d and e): The CPIO has just acted in accordance with the provision of RTI Act, 2005 as well as Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016) as amended from time to time.
In view of the above, it is requested to Hon'ble Information Commissioner to kindly consider the above-mentioned facts while hearing the case..." 1.5. A written submission dated 24.02.2026 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal.
Page 4 of 16Second Appeal No. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140646
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.09.2024 seeking information on the following points:
Kindly provide me the information and details as: A) Procedure for making requests for access information B) Person or Department in- charge to wham such requests can be made having jurisdiction over the area named Tehsil Shimla (Rural) District Shimla (HP) under the Regulations mentioned below to access, get and obtain the relevant Aadhaar related information
1. Regulation 9 (c) of Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulation, 2016,
2. Regulation 3 (2) (c) and 32 (2) of Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies Benefits and Services) Regulation, 2016,
3. Regulation 3 (3) and 4(3) of Aadhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulation, 2016,
4. Other applicable Regulations (if any) etc. 2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 14.10.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"..जन सूचना अिधिनयम, 2005 के अंतगत ा आपके ऑनलाइन आरटीआई आवेदन प पंजीकरण सं ा UIDAI/RXXXX िदनां क 18.09.2024 जोिक इस कायालय म 20.09.2024 को ा आ था, के संदभ म आपको सूिचत िकया जाता है िक आपके ारा मां गी गई जानकारी सब त अनुभाग से ा कर ली गई है , जोिक इस प के साथ प मांक RO/CHD-27/1/2024- RO-CHD/3142 िदनांक 11.10.2024 संल है ।
िब दु सं ा (A&B) 1: At the time of enrolment details are communicated to individuals seeking to enrol by the enrolling agency through the enrolment form, in a provided format. The update history of Aadhaar can be seen on the official website of UIDAI at the link Page 5 of 16 https://resident.uidai.gov.in/aadhaar-updatehistory. Aadhaar authentication history can also be seen at https://resident.uidai.gov.in/aadhaar-auth-history. Registered mobile number is mandatory to avail these service.
िब दु सं ा (A&B) 2. Any Aadhaar Number Holder (ANH) can access his authentication history through the UIDA! website https://resident.uidai.gov.in/aadhaar-auth-history or the mAadhaar application with details available for up to six months. This feature helps individual to monitor when his/her Aadhaar is used for authentication purposes. Additionally, the authentication division of UIDAI sends authentication notifications on registered email of ANH to ensure that Aadhaar holders are promptly informed about access information of Aachaar authentication, allowing them to detect any unauthorized or suspicious activity involving their Aadhaar number. By providing these services. UIDAI helps to protect the privacy of Aadhaar holders and empowers them to safeguard their personal information.
िब दु सं ा (A&B) 3: Aadhaar number holder can get the name of AUA in Aadhaar Authentication history against every Authentication done by Aadhaar number holder. Applicant may be suggested to contact concerned AUA.
It is further informed that all the Aadhaar enrolment and Updation process is governed by the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies. benefits and Services), Act, 2016 (as amended). The Aadhaar Act itself has privacy provision and restricts the sharing of information procured from Aadhaar number holders. [Section 28(2) and (5): Section 29 Page 6 of 16 (2) and (4)] except as per the provisions of the Aadhaar Act or the Regulations framed there under. Further, as inferred from Section 33(1) of Aadhaar Act 2016 and further amended by the..."
2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.11.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 11.12.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
2.3. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.12.2024.
2.4. A written submission dated 23.02.2026 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
"..I am to refer to Notice of Hearing (File no. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140646) dated 03.02.2026 of the appeal/complaint filed by Shri Manoj Sharma, Village- Chandoli, PO-Anandpur, Tehsil and District-Shimla, Himachal Pradesh- 171219 which has been listed for hearing before Hon'ble Chief Information Commissioner Mr. P. R. Ramesh on 2.3.2026 at 11.05 AM.
2. In the above mentioned case, Shri Manoj Sharma vide his RTI application UIDAI/R/E/24/01287 dt. 18.9.2024 making requests for obtaining Aadhaar- related information. He also asked which department or person could provide Aadhaar-related information for the Shimla (Rural) Tehsil area under the various sections/regulations of the Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016, the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Concessions, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, and the Aadhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulations, 2016.
The applicant was informed by the CPIO vide letter dt. 14.10.2024 that the information required to be entered into the individual's Aadhaar is shared with Page 7 of 16 the individual at the time of Aadhaar enrollment/update. Additionally, the applicant/appellant was provided with a link to the Aadhaar authentication and Aadhaar update history.
4 Thereafter, Shri Manoj Sharma lodged an Appeal under registration no. UIDAI/A/E/24/00287 dt 11-11-2024 dissatisfied with the Central Public Information Officer's response, had re-requested the information in his RTI application. The applicant-appellant was informed that Aadhaar number holders are entitled to access only their Aadhaar-related information, for which the Authority has developed mechanisms such as online portals and mobile applications, through which Aadhaar number holders can access limited information through biometric and OTP authentication. The only exception to disclosing Aadhaar information of another Aadhaar number holder is provided in Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, which states that Aadhaar information shall not be disclosed by order of any court inferior to that of a High Court Judge. This information had already been provided to the applicant-appellant by the Central Public Information Officer. The applicant was conveyed accordingly vide order dated 11.12.2024 6 Now, the appellant has approached Hon'ble CIC on the following grounds
a) Information and details not provided till date and within specified time.
b) Inappropriate and unjustified reasons to delay or to provide the required information Response (for a and b): The reply to RTI application dt. 18-9-2024 was provided to the applicant-appellant on 14-10-2024 and the reply to RTI Appeal dt. 11-11-2024 was provided on 11-12-2024 i.e. within the time limit prescribed in the RTI Act, 2005 and it is evident that there was no delay.
c) Direct or Indirect violation of legal heir(s) civil as well as constitutional rights which includes with others speech, expression, liberty, life etc. Page 8 of 16
d) The PIO as well as First Appellate Authority based their decision(s) on law/or/and fact which are non-relevant to the appellant's case
e) The absence of accountability and transparency existed in the functioning of public authority which leading to anarchy in dealings of citizens related and relevant information/ data.
Response (for c.d and e): The CPIO has just acted in accordance with the provision of RTI Act, 2005 as well as Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016) as amended from time to time.
In view of the above, it is requested to Hon'ble Information Commissioner to kindly consider the above-mentioned facts while hearing the case..." 2.5. A written submission dated 24.02.2026 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal.
Second Appeal No. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140812
3. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:
"..A) Kindly provide me the certified copy by post/hand/online of the following:
1) Aadhaar No. 2238 XXXXX Amar Dev 5/o Surat Ram, 2) Aadhaar registration form with all supporting documents as submitted by Aadhaar holder on getting himself registered for said Aadhaar Number. B) Kindly also provide me the detail information with government subsidy/facility name, amount and date when the said Aadhaar No. is used and utilized for any government subsides/facilities till date.
1 am a legal heir of Late Shri Amar Dev having the said Aadhaar and legal heir certificate is attached for your information and intimation..."
Page 9 of 163.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.09.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"..जन सूचना अिधिनयम, 2005 के अंतगत आम आपके दो ऑनलाइन आरटीआई आवेदन प पंजीकरण सं ा UIDAI/R/E/24/01129 िदनाक 20.08.2024 तथा UIDAI/R/E/24/01135 िदनां क 21.08.2024 जोिक इस कायालय म मशः 20.08.2024 तथा 23.08.2024 को ा ए ह: के संदभ म आपको सूिचत िकया जाता है िक आपके ारा वां िछत सूचना संबंिधत अनुभाग र ा कर ली गई है , जोिक इस प के साथ प माK RO-CHD-27/1/2024-RO-CHD/2570 तथा RO-CHD-27/1/2024- RO-CHD/2569 िदनां क 04.09.2024 संल ह।
िब दु सं ा A (1) & (2): आवेदक ारा मां गी गई सू चना िकसी की गत सू चना से संबंिधत है िजसके कटीकरण म कोई बडा सावजिनक िहत नहीं जान पड़ता है तथा िजसके कटीकरण से उ की िनजता भंग हो सकती है। इस कार की सू चना की सूबना के अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 की धारा 8(1)(j) के तहत कटीकरण से छूट दी गई है। अल उ ावधान के तहत आवेदक की सू चना दान नहीं की जा सकती है। इसके अित र भारतीय िविश पहचान ािधकरणा का ेक िनवासी की पहचान तथा माणीकरण रकॉड की गोपनीयता सुिनि त करने तथा ािधकरण के पास मौजू द जानकारी को कटीकरण से संरि त करने हे तु िवशेष कदम उठाने का दािय सोपा गया है। अतः इस कार की जानकारी का आधार (िव ीय और अ छूटों. लाभों और सेवाओं की लि त दायगी) अिधिनयम, 2016 की धारा 28 तथा 29 के तहत भी िकसी अ िनवासी के साथ साझा नहीं िकया जा सकता िब दु सं ा B. वां िछत सू चना भारतीय िविश पहचान ािधकरण, े ीय कायालय, चंडीगढ़ म उपल नहीं है ।.."
3.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Page 10 of 16 Appeal dated 18.09.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 11.12.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
3.3. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.12.2024.
3.4. A written submission dated 23.02.2026 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
"...6. Now, the appellant has approached Hon'ble CIC on the following grounds
a) Information and details not provided till date and within specified time.
b) Inappropriate and unjustified reasons to delay or to provide the required information Response (for a and b): The reply to RTI application dt. 20.8.2024 was provided to the applicant-appellant on 5-9-2024 and the reply to RTI Appeal dt. 18-9-2024 was provided on 3.10.2024 i.e. within the time limit prescribed in the RTI Act, 2005 and it is evident that there was no delay.
c) Direct or Indirect violation of legal heir(s) civil as well as constitutional rights which includes with others speech, expression, liberty, life etc.
d) The PIO as well as First Appellate Authority based their decision(s) on law/or/and fact which are non-relevant to the appellant's case
e) The absence of accountability and transparency existed in the functioning of public authority which leading to anarchy in dealings of citizens related and relevant information/ data.
Response (for c,d and e): The CPIO has just acted in accordance with the provision of RTI Act, 2005 as well as Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016) as amended from time to time.
Page 11 of 16In view of the above, it is requested to Hon'ble Information Commissioner to kindly consider the above-mentioned facts while hearing the case..." 3.5. A written submission dated 24.02.2026 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present through video-conference Respondent: Shri Sonu Kumar Kothari, Director - participated in the hearing through video conference.
4. The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been provided to him till date. He averred that he had sought documents which he had submitted for enrollment of Aadhar Card and also details of subsidy/facility linked with his Aadhar Number. A written submission dated 24.02.2026 reiterating the aforementioned facts has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal. As regards file No. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140812, he averred that he had sought information regarding Aadhar number of his uncle and he is legally entitled to get the information sought as he is the legal heir.
5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the documents submitted by the Appellant himself cannot be said to fall under the ambit of information as defined under Section 2(f) as per the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the matter PIO, Registrar, High Court Madras versus Central Information Commission & B. Bharathi (WPC 26781 of 2013). As regards details of government benefits availed by an Aadhaar number holder using their Aadhaar is not available in their office. He further stated that applicant-appellant was informed that Aadhaar number holders are entitled to access only their Aadhaar-related information, for which the Authority has developed mechanisms such as online portals and mobile applications, through which Aadhaar number holders can access limited information through biometric and OTP Page 12 of 16 authentication. The only exception to disclosing Aadhaar information of another Aadhaar number holder is provided in Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, which states that Aadhaar information shall not be disclosed by order of any court inferior to that of a High Court Judge. This information has already been provided to the Appellant by the CPIO. As regards file No. CIC/UIDAI/A/2024/140812, the PIO stated that legal heir certificate as attached with the RTI Application includes 2 more legal heirs and NOC from other legal heirs has not been provided by the Appellant. Furthermore, Aadhaar information of another Aadhaar number holder is personal information and the only exception provided in Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, which states that Aadhaar information shall not be disclosed by order of any court inferior to that of a High Court Judge. He averred that as the information provided (including the prescribed documents) by such Individual/resident to UIDAI for generation of Aadhaar Number/updating demographic or biometric information under the said Act is personal and confidential in nature. Any such information forms part of Central Identity Data Repository (hereinafter referred to as "CIDR") database upon enrolment/updation. Sharing of such stored information is prohibited under Section 28(5) of Aadhaar Act, 2016 which is being reproduced as follows:
"28. Security and confidentiality of information- (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, and save as otherwise provided in this Act, the Authority of any of its officers or other employees or any agency that maintains the Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR) shall not, whether during his service or thereafter, reveal any information stored in Central Identities Data Repository or authentication record to anyone:
Provided that an Aadhaar number holder may request the Authority to provide access to his identity information excluding his core biometric information in such manner as may be specified by regulations".Page 13 of 16
6. Thus, in view of the above statutory provision, the sought information could not be provided. He further contended that various sections of Aadhaar Act. 2016 has non-
obstante clause. A bare perusal of the provisions of Section 28(5) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 as mentioned above clearly shows that the said provision will prevail irrespective of any other law for the time being in force. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in catena of decisions such as Bank of India vs. Ketan Prakash & Ors. passed in the year 2008 has observed that if two enactments have competing non-obstante provision and nothing repugnant, then the non-obstante clause of the subsequent statute/Act would prevail over the earlier enactments.
Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the Appellant had filed 3 RTI Application seeking information related to his own Aadhar Number, his uncle's Aadhar Number and matters related thereto. it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by concerned PIO. Furthermore, written submission filed by the Respondent is comprehensive and self-explanatory. Commission notes that as submitted by the Respondent Aadhaar number holders are entitled to access only their Aadhaar- related information, for which the Authority has developed mechanisms such as online portals and mobile applications, through which Aadhaar number holders can access limited information through biometric and OTP authentication. As regards seeking copies of documents submitted by Appellant himself. Attention is drawn to verdict dated 17.09.2014 by Madras High Court in the matter "PIO, Registrar, High Court Madras versus Central Information Commission & B.Bharathi (WPC 26781 of 2013) wherein the Hon'ble Court observed as under:
"26. Insofar as query (iv) is concerned, we fail to understand as to how the second respondent is entitled to justify his claim for seeking the copies of his own complaints and appeals. It is needless to say that they are not the information available within the knowledge of the petitioner; on the other Page 14 of 16 hand, admittedly, they are the documents of the second respondent himself, and therefore, if he does not have copies of the same, he has to blame himself and he cannot seek those details as a matter of right, thinking that the High Court will preserve his frivolous applications as treasures/valuable assets. Further, those documents cannot be brought under the definition "information" as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Therefore, we reject the contention of the second respondent in this aspect...".
8. In the light of the foregoing facts it is evident that appropriate reply, in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act, has been duly provided to the Appellant. Commission finds no requirement for intervention in these cases under the RTI Act. The matters are disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(P R Ramesh) (पी. आर. रमेश) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy Vivek Agarwal (िववेक अ वाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26107048 Addresses of the parties:
1 The CPIO Office of the Director & CPIO, Unique Identification Authority of India, UIDAI Regional Office, S.C.O. No.-95-98, Sector-17-B, Chandigarh-160017.Page 15 of 16
2 Manoj Sharma Page 16 of 16 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)