The CPI(M) in parliament opposed the Aadhaar Bill being declared as a money bill. Why was this so? R Jaganathan, Chennai THE Modi government had introduced the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill in the Lok Sabha. On the request of the government, the speaker allowed the introduction of the legislation as a money bill. As per the constitution, a money bill cannot be amended or changed by the Rajya Sabha. It can only send its recommendations to the Lok Sabha, which alone can take a final decision. In the case of the Aadhaar Bill, the speaker of the Lok Sabha defined it as a Money Bill exercising the powers under Article 110 (3) of the constitution. This decision is faulty going by the provision of the constitution. Article 110 (1) states the grounds on which a bill can be declared as a money bill. As per 110 (2), a bill cannot be deemed to be a money bill, if it only provides for augmenting a revenue collection or disbursal of money or services. On the basis of these provisions, the Aadhaar Bill cannot be termed a money bill. The speaker of the Lok Sabha has been conferred the power to take a final decision, if any question arises whether a bill is a money bill or not. The bill has raised questions about the right to privacy of citizens and how biometric information and data base of citizens will be utilised. Since this bill concerns serious questions of the rights of citizens, it is totally wrong to have characterised this as a money bill. The only purpose of making the Aadhaar Bill a money bill was to circumvent the Rajya Sabha where the government does not have a majority. The leader of the House in the Rajya Sabha, Arun Jaitley, had gone on record sometime back that the Lok Sabha is supreme and the Rajya Sabha cannot have a veto power on legislation. This is an argument patently against the constitutional arrangement and the role of the two houses of parliament as set out in the constitution. The CPI(M) was, therefore, totally against the unconstitutional maneouvre adopted in the case of the Aadhaar legislation being termed as a money bill. There are good grounds to approach the Supreme Court for reviewing this decision of the speaker based on the constitutional provisions.