‘Forced to knock on our doors’: Patna High Court laments large number of pleas for date of birth correction in Aadhaar

Directions to UIDAI

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that his correct date of birth was July 24, 2007, but in the Aadhaar database, it was wrongly recorded as 2008. The counsel argued that the petitioner made an application before the authorities, but the same was not considered, nor any reason specified.

On the other hand, the counsel for the Union submitted that the petitioner, with representation, may appear before the director of the regional office of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in Bailey Road, Patna, on any working day to get the work done.

It was submitted that the necessary correction in the Aadhar database shall be made by looking to the statutory documents required.

“It is expected that the Director, UIDAI Regional Office, Patna, would issue appropriate instruction to the persons who are dealing with such issues, so that this Court is unnecessary not burdened with such petitions where, for correction of date of birth, the statutory requirement of documents are already being fulfilled and the persons who are at the helm of affairs are to carry out the formalities, and accordingly, the necessary corrections are required to be made in the Aadhar database which somewhere is not being addressed properly,” the Patna High Court said.

“Considering the nature of relief sought, this Court finds it appropriate to direct this petitioner to approach the Director, UIDAI Regional Office, Patna, within a period of one week, and on his appearance it is expected that necessary corrections shall be made looking to the nature of the document, which is required for making such corrections,” the court observed.

‘Aadhaar card not DOB proof’

In 2024, the Supreme Court had ruled that Aadhaar cards cannot be used as proof of age, given that other official documents, such as the school leaving certificate, serve that purpose.

A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Ujjal Bhuyan was tasked with determining the compensation to be given to the family of a man who died following a motorcycle accident.

Earlier, the Punjab and Haryana High Court reduced the compensation in the matter to Rs 9,22,336, noting that the deceased was 47 years old according to his Aadhaar card when he died, meaning a multiplier of 13 was to be applied under the Motor Vehicles Act (MVA). The victim’s family appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, however, relied on the 2018 constitutional bench ruling where Justice Dr A K Sikri described Aadhaar as “proof of identity”, as well as a UIDAI circular reiterating that Aadhaar is “not a proof of date of birth”.

The top court thus upheld a multiplier of 14 to calculate the compensation based on the age on the School Leaving Certificate and awarded the family Rs 15 lakh.