Supreme Court seeks Centre's response on PILs challenging Digital Personal Data Protection Act
The PILs have challenged the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act by which the public interest clause for disclosure of personal information was removed
The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to respond to petitions challenging provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 that allegedly diluted transparency under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
The PILs have challenged the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act by which the public interest clause for disclosure of personal information was removed.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana heard submissions from advocates Prashant Bhushan and Vrinda Grover for the petitioners and asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to file the Centre’s response.
The amendment altered the earlier provision by removing safeguards that balanced privacy concerns with the public's right to know, Grover submitted.
Maintaining that the Centre would justify the amendment, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought two weeks to file its response.
"The question is whether there can be a blanket prohibition on disclosure of all digital personal information, or whether the legislation has to adopt a proportionate approach," Justice Bagchi said.
"The Right to Information Act operates on a much larger domain. It covers all forms of information, not merely digital information. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act operates in a much narrower sliver, although today that narrow sliver constitutes the overwhelming part of information.
“The State appears to have adopted a more cautionary approach. The question is whether that cautionary approach, and the classification it creates, has a reasonable and intelligible differentia having regard to the object of the law," Justice Bagchi noted.
In February, the top court had refused to stay the impugned amendment, saying it was a complex issue involving balancing the fundamental right to privacy and the fundamental right to information that required a careful consideration.
The Supreme Court had on April 13 asked the Centre to respond to PILs challenging provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 that allegedly dilute transparency under the 2005 Right to Information Act.
It had sought responses from the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) and the Ministry of Law and Justice to PILs was filed by 'Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan', activists Aruna Roy, Nikhil Dey and Shankar Singh Rawat and others.
The petition challenges Section 44 of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, which substitutes Section 8 of the RTI Act.
Among the key reliefs sought, the petitioners have urged the court to restore the original Section 8 of the RTI Act, along with its proviso, with retrospective effect from November 13, 2025.
"Declare that the proactive disclosure mandate under Section 4 of the RTI Act, which enabled disclosure of beneficiary data, muster rolls, social audit records, and similar records affecting rights of citizens under Article 21 of the Constitution shall continue to operate unaffected by the enactment of the DPDP Act, and that the State is constitutionally obligated to maintain and operationalise this proactive disclosure architecture," the plea said.
The petition called for directions restraining authorities from "dismantling, restricting, or abridging access to information currently provided through transparency and 41 accountability portals …including the Jan Soochna Portal and all analogous portals established pursuant to obligations under the RTI Act or any other welfare legislation."
