Supreme Court Rejects WhatsApp Restoration Plea, Endorses 'Arattai' for Government Officials

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed a plea from a Central government employee seeking to restore his blocked WhatsApp account. The apex court not only upheld WhatsApp's right to block accounts for alleged sharing of confidential government documents but also strongly advocated for the use of 'Arattai', an indigenous Indian messaging platform, for official communications among government personnel.

The petitioner, identified as a Superintendent from the Goods and Services Tax (GST) department, approached the Supreme Court after his WhatsApp account was blocked without prior notice.

He contended that the blocking was arbitrary and severely impacted both his personal and professional life, claiming that many of his colleagues and superiors relied on WhatsApp for official correspondence. He vehemently denied sharing any confidential government documents.

However, the Additional Solicitor General, representing the government, informed the court that the petitioner's account was indeed blocked following allegations of him sharing "sensitive documents" via the messaging platform.

This assertion formed the core of the defence against the petitioner's plea.

During the proceedings, Justice Sanjiv Khanna made a pointed observation, stating, "If you are sharing government documents, then WhatsApp has a right to block your account." Further emphasizing the judiciary's stance, Justice Dipankar Datta questioned the prevailing practice among government officers: "Why are you all using WhatsApp? When you have 'Arattai' app, why should you use WhatsApp?"

The Supreme Court's ruling underscores a growing push towards enhancing digital security and promoting indigenous technological solutions within government agencies.

The 'Arattai' app, developed by the National Informatics Centre (NIC) and National Information Centre Services Inc (NICSI), was launched in 2020 specifically to provide a secure communication channel for government employees. Its design prioritizes data security and confidentiality, making it an ideal choice for sensitive official communications.

Ultimately, the petition was dismissed, with the court asserting that the petitioner's fundamental rights were not violated, as he retained various alternative means of communication, including the 'Arattai' app for official purposes.

This decision sends a clear message about the accountability of government employees regarding the use of private messaging platforms for official business and highlights the judiciary's encouragement of secure, government-approved alternatives.