IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
CWJC No. 11111 of 2025
(17.1.2026)
Dr. Shyam Kumar Satyapal & Ors. ... Petitioners
vs.
National Medical Commission, Sector 8, Dwarka, New Delhi- 110077, through its Chairman & Ors. ... Respondents
Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 – Secions 7, 8, 23, 53 & 57 – Aadhar Authentication Rules, 2020 – Rule 3 – Aadhar Authentication in Medical Colleges introducing by the National Medical Commission making Face based Aadhar Authentication and sharing Global Positioning System (GPS) mandatory for marking attendance in Medical Colleges and Hospitals – Petitioners are medical officers and faculty members of a few medical colleges and hospitals in the State of Bihar – Their grievance is infringement of right of privacy – The NMC is a statutory body, controlling the medical education, ethics and other related matters of the country – It is found by the NMC during their inspection that the medical colleges are run with inadequate numbers of teaching staff – The government and Government aided medical colleges are run by inadequate faculty members, in efficient contractual teachers, lesser number of laboratory and technical assistants and administrative staff – Under such circumstances if the NMC introduces a full proof attendance system of faculty members, such system should not be scrapped on the ground of arbitrariness and in constitutional – The merit found in the instant writ petition and accordingly dismissed – -Writ petition dismissed. (Para 40)
K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) Vs. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1; K.S. Puttaswamy (Aadhaar-5J.) Vs. Union of India, (2019) 1 SCC 1; Binoy Viswam Vs. Union of India, (2017) 7 SCC 59; Unioin of India Vs. Dillip Kumar Rout, Civil Appeal No. 13572 of 2015, decided on 29th October, 2025—Relied.
Bibek Chaudhuri, J.—A constitutional issue of violation of Right to Privacy is the bone of contention of the instant writ petition, where some medical practitioners, who are in employment in different Medical Colleges and Hospitals in the State of Bihar, have challenged the public notice, dated 17th of April, 2025, issued under the signature of the Secretary, National Medical Commission, whereby face based Aadhar Identification and sharing of GPS location for marking attendance of faculty members of the medical colleges has been directed to be mandatorily implemented in all medical colleges/institutions. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing subsequent orders bearing Memo No. 1128 of 2025, dated 21st of April, 2025 issued under the signature of the Member, Sri Krishna Medical College, Muzaffarpur and the letter bearing no. 414 (17) dated 30th of April, 2025, whereby and whereunder, all the departmental heads have been directed for implementation of notice, dated 16th of April, 2025.
2. For the sake of brevity, this Court finds it appropriate, at the outset, to set out the prayers / reliefs prayed by the petitioners in the instant writ petition:—
“i. To issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of certiorari for quashing the public notice dated 16.04.2025 issued under the signature of the Secretary, National Medical Commission, whereby the FACE based Aadhar authentication and sharing of Global Positioning System (GPS) for marking attendance of faculty has been directed for mandatory implementation in all medical colleges/institutions (Annexure-P/1, Pg.28.).
ii. To issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/direction(s) in the nature of certiorari for quashing the office order bearing memo no. 1128/25 dated 21.04.2025 issued under the signature of Principal, Sri Krishna Medical College & Hospital, Muzaffarpur, whereby all the Departmental Heads have been directed for implementation of FACE based Aadhar authentication for marking attendance of doctors / faculty doctors through Face Biometric authentication from 01.05.2025. (Annexure-P/2, Pg. 45).
iii. To issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter bearing no. 414(17) dated 30.04.2025 issued under the signature of Officer on Special Duty, Health Department, whereby pursuant to the notice of the NMC dated 16.04.2025, the Principals / Superintendents of all the Government Medical Colleges and Hospitals in the state of Bihar have been directed to mandatorily implement the FACE based Aadhar authentication for marking attendance of doctors / faculty doctors (Annexure-P/3, Pg.46.).
iv. To issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to implement the FACE based Aadhar authentication for marking attendance of doctors/faculty doctors.
v. To issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to delete all data collected pursuant to the public notice dated 16.04.2025.
vi. To any other relief(s) that the petitioners are entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. The case of the petitioners is that they are faculty members being Assistant Officers, Professor and Heads of the Department, Associate Professor in Sri Krishna Medical College and Hospital, Muzaffarpur; Jawahar Lal Nahru Medical College and Hospital, Bhagalpur; Government College, Bettiah; Nalanda Medical College and Hospital; Government Medical College, Purnia; Darbhanga Medical College and Hospital and Government Medical College, Purnia, respectively.
4. They are aggrieved by a public notice, dated 16th of April, 2025, issued by the National Medical Commission (hereinafter referred to as “NMC” for short) by virtue of which, all medical colleges / institutions under the NMC were directed to fully shift his face based Aadhar Authentication for marking attendance NMC from 1st of May, 2025. It was mentioned in the said pu
K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) vs. Union of India
Mandatory Aadhar-based facial recognition attendance is unconstitutional as it violates the right to privacy under Articles 14, 19, and 21 and must be voluntary as per the Aadhar Act.
Penalties for attendance discrepancies must be justified and backed by clear regulations; arbitrary reductions in student intake are unreasonable if lacking sufficient rationale.
Consent forms for educational initiatives must include opt-out provisions to protect individuals' right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The restriction imposed by the 2016 Rules on the right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) is reasonable and thus saved by clause (6) of Article 19.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.