Supreme Court seeks Centre’s reply on plea against data law’s impact on RTI transparency

The Supreme Court on Monday sought a response of the Centre on a PIL challenging provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 that allegedly dilute transparency under the 2005 Right to Information Act. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi sought responses from the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) and the Ministry of Law and Justice after taking note of the submissions of senior advocate Shayam Divan appearing for the PIL petitioners. The bench also directed that Rajasthan be also impleaded as a party to the proceedings. The PIL was filed by ‘Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan’ along with activists Aruna Roy, Nikhil Dey and Shankar Singh Rawat.

The petition challenges Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, which substitutes Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. "Issue a writ of certiorari or a declaration, striking down Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, insofar as it substitutes Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, as unconstitutional and void, being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution of India,” the plea said. Among the key reliefs sought, the petitioners have urged the court to restore the original Section 8(1)(j) 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. Further, the plea calls 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 (Rajasthan) and all analogous portals established pursuant to obligations under the RTI Act or any other welfare legislation,” it said.