Supreme Court Flags Worrisome Private Access to EPFO and Income-Tax Data

The Supreme Court called alleged private access to EPFO and income-tax data “worrisome” on August 24, 2026, and asked the Union government to consider safeguards against misuse of sensitive records. The bench stopped short of deciding the privacy allegations on their merits.

It also pressed the government for a response. The judges said a comprehensive decision would be appreciated, preferably within 4 months.

The petition alleged that private verification firms could retrieve employment and tax information through a commercial technology ecosystem. Counsel also told the bench that some organisations allegedly offered access to ITR and provident-fund records for as little as Rs 100.

The court disposed of the PIL and directed the Union and other official respondents to examine the petitioner’s representations. They were asked to take necessary action against misuse.

The government must consider safeguards within a preferred four-month period

The bench described the dispute as one belonging largely to the policy domain. It nevertheless raised concern about private access to “sovereign data,” meaning information citizens provide to public authorities under statutory requirements.

The direction did not establish that a government agency had leaked the records. The allegations instead focused on private verification entities allegedly accessing and commercially exploiting information held through public systems.

The bench suggested that the Centre consult domain experts and create an effective protective mechanism. It directed the Union and the concerned authorities to consider the petitioner’s representations before taking action.

“It will be appreciated if a comprehensive decision is taken preferably in [4 months]”

The requested period is a preference rather than a merits ruling. The petition’s disposal leaves the next response with the executive authorities and departments named in the representations.

The allegations tied PAN and UAN details to employment histories

The plea said a person’s employment history could be revealed after supplying PAN and UAN details to a private verification workflow. It alleged that the process could operate without an OTP, explicit consent, or visible authorization-based identity checks.

The filing described a “commercial technology ecosystem” that could access, retrieve, and verify personal employment and financial information. It also cited tools advertised with names including “EPFO Passbook API,” “Form 26AS API,” and “Income Tax Return API.”

Counsel allegedly told the bench that private organisations were offering access to citizens’ ITR and provident-fund records for as little as Rs 100. The claim placed a specific price on the alleged commercial availability of records.

The petition connected work-history information with tax records. Its allegations covered the following categories:

The records at issue therefore included both employment information and financial data. The plea framed their alleged private use as a privacy and data-protection problem.

The representations went to labour, technology and tax authorities

Senior Advocate Ruchi Kohli appeared for petitioner Piyush Chhabra. The representations referenced in the case went to the Union Ministry of Labour and Employment, the provident-fund organisation, MeitY, and CERT-In.

They also named the Union Ministry of Finance, the Income Tax Department, and the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The bench directed the Union and other official respondents to consider those submissions.

The alleged conduct involved information that individuals are legally required to provide to public authorities. The petition argued that private entities could turn that statutory data into a commercial verification service.

The court’s concern centred on the possible misuse of such access. It did not declare the alleged private access unlawful in this proceeding.

The case invoked Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21

Chhabra filed the matter as a privacy and data-protection challenge under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution. The allegations covered UAN-linked employment information, PAN-linked records, and tax data associated with ITR, Form 26AS, and AIS.

The bench heard the case on August 24, 2026. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant sat with Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana.

The matter was Piyush Chhabra v. Union of India & Ors., Diary No. 30527/2026. As of August 2026, the proceeding stands disposed of with directions for the government and concerned authorities to consider the representations and take necessary action.