Last edited:
Is Aadhar and mobile linking mandatory
- Thread starter SureshWarrier2412
- Start date
^^ Its obvious that is what they will do and people who don't know jack shit about technology go about supporting them. I mean, there are illegal Aadhaar centers being setup at every nook and corner for some time now,
No, they are operating openly and use hacked versions of the software pointed in the article. If you see a place that is primarily into some other business like Photo-copying, cyber cafe, repair centers, PAN, drivers license etc broker services and they also advertise Aadhaar related services, they are likely using this hacked software. Most of them don't get into enrollment, but offer all other services like phone number linking, address changes etc. And no, they don't use the Aadhaar portal to offer these services. They use the software. The official centers are all listed in the UIDAI site. In order to legally operate, they need to get a license and there is a process for that which per my understanding includes a written exam too. Most these operators just get the hacked software and run their business on it.
paarkhi
Skilled
contact huffpost, they are in possession of the patch softwareSo, how to get another adhaar number?
adventureguy
Skilled
UIDAI logic. The servers are behind 56inch walls and security guards so nothing was stolen
Futureized
Skilled
They clearly twisted there tongue/legs. There was no theft..
Lets keep voting in 2019..
If there is any political site for debates kindly PM me.. (no reply required here)
h
Lets keep voting in 2019..
If there is any political site for debates kindly PM me.. (no reply required here)
h
Tried to get a JioFi device here in Mumbai yesterday.. was arrogantly told by their give a f*** minded staff.. no Aadhaar no connection.
I'm like you do realise there's a Supreme Court ruling that says Aadhaar cannot be made as mandatory and sole proof of ID? And he just starts putting the device away saying Yahaan pe Aadhaar hi chahiye..
I'm like you do realise there's a Supreme Court ruling that says Aadhaar cannot be made as mandatory and sole proof of ID? And he just starts putting the device away saying Yahaan pe Aadhaar hi chahiye..
That supreme court ruling only says that Aaadhaar linking for existing numbers is not mandatory till they give judgement.
Jio uses it for e-kyc during enrollment which is a completely different thing and as per my understanding, they don't have any other means to open a connection at the moment.
Using it this way as a e-kyc only enrollment system is their choice as a business and I doubt even supreme court can make them stop that unless Aadhaar itself is completely scrapped.
Jio uses it for e-kyc during enrollment which is a completely different thing and as per my understanding, they don't have any other means to open a connection at the moment.
Using it this way as a e-kyc only enrollment system is their choice as a business and I doubt even supreme court can make them stop that unless Aadhaar itself is completely scrapped.
I guess it's a technicality? Simple point being, aadhar cannot be the exclusive means to identity for a citizen, e-kyc or not, it amounts to a denial of service and in a way discrimination? I'm no legal expert but someone who is can opine on the matter.
Nevertheless, there have been cases where JioCare have been notified about this by some customers and they have confirmed they can use alternate ID verification to provide services. So it's just surprising they are insisting on Aadhar exclusively for e-kyc.
N
NotMyRealName
But that's the whole problem. The entire country's opinions (including the so-called SC's) remain just that; opinions. The party does what it wants, regardless.
p.s. waiting for petrol to hit 100 so i can throw a century party. almost 90 in bombay...
Interestingly I've noticed this to be the case with certain companies who are deemed to be be - shall I say - bhakts? Lol .. like Paytm.
It's clear they insist on Aadhaar.. their option of using alternate forms of ID for verification is a sham.. the app accepts you entering alternate ID details but does nothing to confirm at the verification step. Now you can't add any amount to Paytm without submitting Aadhaar for an e KYC.
Couldn't care less. I just stopped using Paytm.
It didn't really surprise me when the media expose on Paytm boss revealed their shady dealings in sharing data with the govt etc without giving a f**k
Last month I called Jio customer care to ask how to get new Jio connection without Adhaar,
Executive told me to go through paper based KYC and he confirmed I can use my voter ID.
But, he told me that paper based KYC can be done at very few Jio offices.
You only need to ask where in Mumbai this facility is available.
Thanks. Didn't know. Neither did the guy bother to inform me or give me this option.
I think they're just making it difficult for us and convenient for them
The (Supreme) court can rule whether Aadhaar is mandatory to be linked with all existing phone numbers, It can also rule whether it can be linked to govt services.
But they cannot rule whether a service provider has to accept other forms of Id. The regulation on telecom companies presently for opening new accounts only state that the company should collect necessary identification details of the customer and be able to provide the same to law enforcement if necessary. So the company is doing its job as long as they are fulfilling that obligation. If the company is using only Aadhar based e-KYC, it is their business decision to do so at their own risk of losing some customers. As long as Aadhaar remains a valid form of identification under the regulation, they are free to do so. They are not obligated to accept other forms of Identification.
Its not much different from how Banks handle address changes. Each have their own process based on their own risk strategies. ICICI requires you to submit an Id proof and new address proof documents at their bank branch. HDFC requires you to either submit a address proof online or just Id proof if you go in person to bank. Both accept HR letter of any reputed company as address proof document. HSBC on the other hand may require you submit a visiting card issued by company along with HR letter.[DOUBLEPOST=1537774660][/DOUBLEPOST]
He probably doesn't know it himself.
N
NotMyRealName
Right after demonetisation, i quickly realised paytm is in cahoots with the govt and stopped using it. People on this very forum laughed and said 'where's the proof'. Anyway, i'd rather follow my gut/instincts than bother about what other people think. If the game is played well enough, there will never be proof. Untill someone like snowden comes along and blows the top off all those 'conspiracy theories'.
As i said earlier, even if the SC rules on something, the govt. won't always follow it. Even now, they've been contradicting many SC orders either blatantly or shadily.
The (Supreme) court can rule whether Aadhaar is mandatory to be linked with all existing phone numbers, It can also rule whether it can be linked to govt services.
But they cannot rule whether a service provider has to accept other forms of Id. The regulation on telecom companies presently for opening new accounts only state that the company should collect necessary identification details of the customer and be able to provide the same to law enforcement if necessary. So the company is doing its job as long as they are fulfilling that obligation. If the company is using only Aadhar based e-KYC, it is their business decision to do so at their own risk of losing some customers. As long as Aadhaar remains a valid form of identification under the regulation, they are free to do so. They are not obligated to accept other forms of Identification.
Its not much different from how Banks handle address changes. Each have their own process based on their own risk strategies. ICICI requires you to submit an Id proof and new address proof documents at their bank branch. HDFC requires you to either submit a address proof online or just Id proof if you go in person to bank. Both accept HR letter of any reputed company as address proof document. HSBC on the other hand may require you submit a visiting card issued by company along with HR letter.[DOUBLEPOST=1537774660][/DOUBLEPOST]
He probably doesn't know it himself.
I get what you're saying, all I'm saying is that I've yet to come across any business which relies exclusively on 1 form of ID for verification.
For example, passport, pan, driving licence all are accepted as valid proof of ID and a customer is not excluded from a service for lack of one of them. As an address proof for example, passport is fine, if not an electricity bill, telephone bill or even Society letter for validation is also accepted in many cases.
What I'm trying to say is insisting on exclusive validation by Aadhaar - is it permitted or not? Because I have a doubt as one can take a stand and recourse to law on the grounds of discrimination or omission for the lack of Aadhaar for the purposes of establishing identity, residence or any aspect of domicile. Because if this wasn't bad under law then companies like Jio & Paytm wouldn't even offer alternate modes of verification as we found out they do (atleast claim to do so irrespective of whether they actually do or not)
Hope I explained it correctly?
Yes, that is what I tried to reply to. You cannot stop a company from exclusive validation through Aadhaar e-KYC as long as the regulators requirements are achieved. This is a private sector service provider and the service is by no means an essential one in the same lines as for instance govt rations supply. They are only bound by the regulatory requirements and such regulations only have criteria on the kind of documents that are acceptable for the purpose, not impose conditions that all of them should be accepted.
Using e-KYC is more of a business decision taken at the risk of losing some business, but at the gain of making the process easier to deploy. It is the same kind of decision like when the same sort of company may make a self service app for android, but not for iOS or for Windows, but not for Mac OS and Linux or website that works in Chrome and Firefox, but not for IE.
Using e-KYC is more of a business decision taken at the risk of losing some business, but at the gain of making the process easier to deploy. It is the same kind of decision like when the same sort of company may make a self service app for android, but not for iOS or for Windows, but not for Mac OS and Linux or website that works in Chrome and Firefox, but not for IE.