Vilas Prabhakar Lad Vs Unique Identification Authority of India (Bombay High Court)
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Vilas Prabhakar Lad v. UIDAI & Ors. [WRIT PETITION NO. 3586 OF 2021 dated July 22, 2025] held that GST authorities must delete the Aadhaar and PAN linked to the Petitioner’s name from the portal as the registration was fraudulently obtained and expressed deep displeasure at the systemic failure across statutory authorities to act upon clear evidence of impersonation and fraud.
Facts:
Vilas Prabhakar Lad (“the Petitioner”) is a small provisional store owner residing in Mumbai. UIDAI, GST Authorities, Income Tax Department, UTIITSL, Union Bank of India, and others (“the Respondents”) are statutory and regulatory agencies responsible for Aadhaar, PAN, GST registration, and banking compliance.
On December 28, 2019, the Petitioner received a legal notice from a Rajkot-based advocate demanding rent dues of ₹75,000 for a property he never occupied. In reply, the Petitioner denied the allegations and pointed to a possible fraud involving his identity.
On February 14, 2020, another notice under Section 138 of the NI Act was received for dishonour of a cheque of ₹13.83 lakh issued by M/s. Metro International Trading Company. The Petitioner reiterated he had no connection with the said entity. On March 4, 2020, his counsel wrote to Andhra Bank (now Union Bank of India) stating the Petitioner had never opened any account in Gujarat. Union Bank’s response admitted the account was opened using KYC documents bearing the Petitioner’s name but with someone else’s photograph. Union Bank (“the Respondent No.6”) stated that KYC was verified at the time, but photographs are not displayed in their system when PAN or Aadhaar numbers are entered, making facial verification impossible.
On January 29, 2021, the Petitioner wrote to UIDAI and Mumbai GST authorities detailing the fraud, enclosing mismatched Aadhaar copies, and sought cancellation of the fraudulently obtained GST registration. However, the Petitioner was served with an attachment notice in Form GST DRC-01A by the State Tax Department of Gujarat.
Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) (“the Respondent No.1”) responded by stating it cannot issue a new Aadhaar as per the Act, and fraud matters lie outside its jurisdiction.
UTI Infrastructure & Technology Service (“the Respondent No.3”) stated it had a limited role in PAN issuance and followed instructions from CBDT.
The Petitioner contended that the Respondents failed to protect his identity, breached duties under the Aadhaar Act, GST Act, and RBI circulars, and took no action despite years of complaints, making him suffer civil and criminal consequences.
The Respondents contended that their role was limited or that jurisdiction to address the fraud lies elsewhere. Notably, the Income Tax Department failed to appear.
Aggrieved by the misuse of his Aadhaar and PAN leading to unlawful GST registration, criminal proceedings, and property attachment, the Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Issue:
Whether the inaction of statutory authorities including UIDAI, GST authorities, Income Tax Department, and the concerned bank in response to identity fraud and misuse of Aadhaar and PAN for obtaining GST registration violates their statutory obligations and fundamental rights of the Petitioner?
Held:
