The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) and, city-based NGO, ASEEM demanded that the proposed unified card be kept in abeyance due to the absence of a legal framework. They said they have submitted a representation to the State government.In May this year, the Telangana Chief Minister directed officials to explore the possibility of developing a unified card that would extend benefits across welfare schemes being implemented in the State. According to the Chief Minister, the objective was to build welfare profiles of beneficiaries and bring about greater transparency in implementation by analysing data using artificial intelligence.Both IFF and ASEEM argued that the card fails the first test laid down by the Supreme Court in the K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India case, which recognised the right to privacy as a Fundamental Right. The judgment held that any restriction on privacy by the State must meet three conditions — a legal basis, pursue a legitimate State aim, and be proportionate to that aim.They contended that any move to create a unique identity number, collect data on every resident and link it to a single profile requires legislation. “An executive direction or departmental order is not ‘law’ for the purposes of Article 21. Without a statute that defines the purpose, limits the data collected, governs retention, sharing and security, and provides independent oversight and redress, the scheme is without authority of law,” they stated.They also claimed that the Chief Minister’s directions do not include a provision for “human review”. “Automated matching fails routinely on spelling variations, data entry errors and outdated records. When it does, a person of means loses convenience,” they argued.The representation also demanded that any data integration proposal be referred to the legislature. It called for the adoption of data minimisation, auditing and public disclosure of the functioning of Integrated People Information Hub created using the Samagra Kutumba Survey data, and its discontinuation until it is governed by a lawful framework. It further sought field verification, guaranteed human review, and the establishment of a grievance rederessal mechanism for those denied benefits. Published - July 16, 2026 08:42 pm IST