What Happened
- The Union Minister for Electronics and Information Technology stated that the government was actively discussing age-based restrictions on social media use for children at the central level.
- This followed Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh announcing state-level bans on social media for children — Karnataka for under-16 and Andhra Pradesh for under-13.
- Legal and constitutional experts clarified that internet regulation is squarely within the Centre's exclusive domain under the Union List (Entry 31, Seventh Schedule of the Constitution).
- The central regulatory framework — the IT Act, 2000 and IT Rules, 2021 — governs all social media platforms operating in India, and platforms respond only to central government orders.
- States can use their police power to regulate behaviour or establish welfare programs for children, but cannot impose binding obligations on platforms operating across state and national boundaries.
Static Topic Bridges
Seventh Schedule — Union List Entry 31: Internet as Exclusively Central
The constitutional provision governing this jurisdictional dispute is clear and well-established.
- Article 246(1): Parliament alone can legislate on Union List (List I) subjects.
- Entry 31, Union List (Seventh Schedule): "Posts and telegraphs; telephones, wireless, broadcasting and other like forms of communication." — Courts and governments have consistently held that internet services fall under "other like forms of communication."
- Entry 13, State List: "Communications, that is to say, roads, bridges, ferries, and other means of communication not specified in List I" — roads and physical infrastructure, not digital communications; explicitly excludes matters already in List I.
- The Telecommunications Act, 2023 (which replaced the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885) further entrenches central legislative authority over all forms of telecommunication including broadband and internet services.
- Article 254(1): On Concurrent List matters, central law prevails over repugnant state law — but internet is not in the Concurrent List, so this provision doesn't apply; state laws are simply void.
Connection to this news: The MeitY minister's statement that the Centre is examining age-based restrictions is constitutionally correct — any enforceable national framework must come from Parliament or the central executive. State bans, however well-intentioned, lack the constitutional foundation to bind platforms.
IT Act, 2000 — The Governing Central Framework
The IT Act, 2000 is the comprehensive central statute governing all aspects of internet and digital platform regulation in India.
- Enacted by Parliament under Entry 31 and Entry 97 (residuary powers) of the Union List.
- Section 69A: Central government power to block online content/platforms — no parallel state power exists.
- Section 79: Safe harbour protection for intermediaries (social media platforms) — conditional on compliance with central government rules (IT Rules, 2021).
- IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (Rule 3): Defines "Significant Social Media Intermediary" (SSMI) — any intermediary with more than 50 lakh (5 million) registered users in India.
- Rule 4 of IT Rules, 2021: Additional obligations for SSMIs — Grievance Redressal Officer, Nodal Officer, Chief Compliance Officer — all accountable to central authorities.
- Rule 4(4): SSMIs should endeavour to deploy age verification tools for users.
- Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): Supreme Court struck down Section 66A (overbroad speech restriction) but upheld the IT Act's central architecture, confirming exclusive central regulatory authority over internet platforms.
Connection to this news: Social media platforms' legal obligations — including any future age-based restrictions — flow from the IT Act and IT Rules, both central instruments. State government notifications or executive orders cannot legally compel platforms to implement state-specific age restrictions.
Centre-State Relations — Article 254 and the Limits of State Power
While states have broad police powers, these powers have constitutional limits when they intersect with Union List subjects.
- Article 162: State executive power extends to all matters on which state legislatures can legislate. Since states cannot legislate on internet regulation (Union List), state executive power in this domain is similarly limited.
- Police power (maintaining public order, welfare of citizens): States can regulate conduct within their territory — e.g., penalising children for accessing social media, regulating schools' digital policies, running awareness campaigns.
- However: States cannot obligate platforms to implement age verification, block access, or modify their services — these are regulatory mandates on interstate/international entities under Union List jurisdiction.
- Article 256: It is the obligation of every state to exercise its executive power to comply with laws made by Parliament — states must not act contrary to central legislation.
- The practical reality: Global social media platforms (Meta, Google, Snap, X) are registered as companies under the Companies Act and regulated under central law; a state notification has no binding legal force on them.
Connection to this news: Karnataka and AP can instruct state schools to restrict social media, educate parents and children, or create state-level guidelines for government institutions — these are valid uses of state executive power. But mandating platforms to block under-age users from their services requires the Centre, not states, to act.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — The Central Solution Already in Place
The DPDP Act, 2023 provides the most directly applicable central framework, though its enforcement remains nascent.
- Section 9, DPDP Act: Data fiduciaries must obtain verifiable parental consent before processing any personal data of children (under 18).
- Section 9's prohibition on targeted advertising, tracking, and monitoring of children applies nationally to all platforms — a stronger protection than what the state bans propose.
- DPDP Rules, 2025: Mandate age verification mechanisms and parental consent workflows for all Data Fiduciaries.
- Enforcement: Data Protection Board of India (DPBI) — a central body with adjudicatory powers and penalty authority (up to ₹250 crore per violation for certain breaches).
- The DPDP Act's definition of "child" (under 18) is broader than Karnataka's proposed cutoff (16) or AP's primary cutoff (13), meaning the central framework already covers a wider age range.
- The Centre's discussion of additional age-based social media restrictions (per MeitY) would likely operate through amendments to DPDP Rules or IT Rules — not new state legislation.
Connection to this news: The irony of the state ban announcements is that a stronger legal framework — the DPDP Act, covering all under-18s — already exists at the central level. The states' announcements may create political pressure on the Centre to accelerate enforcement of the DPDP Act's child protection provisions, which is their practical value even if they lack constitutional backing as independent state mandates.
Key Facts & Data
- Entry 31, Union List (Seventh Schedule): Internet = "other like forms of communication" — exclusively Parliament's domain.
- Article 246(1): Parliament's exclusive power over Union List subjects.
- IT Act, 2000: Section 69A (blocking), Section 79 (safe harbour) — central framework; no state equivalent.
- IT Rules, 2021: Rule 3 defines Significant Social Media Intermediaries (50 lakh+ users); Rule 4 — additional obligations.
- Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): Supreme Court confirmed central IT Act architecture; struck down Section 66A.
- Telecommunications Act, 2023: Replaced Indian Telegraph Act, 1885; governs internet under Entry 31.
- DPDP Act, 2023: Section 9 — parental consent for under-18 data; prohibition on targeted advertising of children.
- DPDP Rules, 2025: Age verification and consent workflows mandated for platforms.
- DPBI penalties: up to ₹250 crore per violation (certain categories).
- Karnataka proposed cutoff: under-16. Andhra Pradesh primary cutoff: under-13 within 90 days.
- DPDP Act definition of "child": under 18 — broader than state proposals.
- MeitY: Confirmed Centre is examining age-based restrictions at national level (March 2026).
- Article 162: State executive power coextensive with legislative power — limited where legislative power is absent.