CMO Bulk Messaging Issue: State Seeks Permission To Send 'Thank You' Messages To CMRDF Donors, Kerala High Court To Decide

An interim application was filed by the State government seeking permission of the Kerala High Court to send 'Thank You' messages to the contributors of the Chief Minister's Disaster Relief Fund (CMDRF).

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas heard detailed arguments advanced by Advocate General (AG) Gopalakrishna Kurup against a plea alleging violation of privacy of government employees and judges by the State by sending bulk messages to their phone numbers, which was illegally accessed from SPARK [Service Pay Roll Administrative Repository for Kerala]. 

The State has also preferred an application seeking permission of the Court to send messages to CMDRF donors. Senior Advocate Poonthottam objected to the application and submitted that an objection will be filed.

"That is given to the Chief Minister's Disaster Relief Fund...What is wrong in the Chief Minister sending a thanks? Already messages have been sent? To how many persons? All employees have contributed?" Justice Bechu orally inquired.

"These are all contributions made to the Chief Minister's relief. In respect of the contributions made to the Chief Minister's relief that is given by the employees of the State. At that point, a receipt was given, acknowledging by the State, by the Government...Personally, I am also a recipient. That was already given. State has already given it...I will produce it. That was sent two years back. 90% of employees have contributed. Other persons have also contributed...," senior counsel for the petitioners answered.

"This is not SPARK," AG added. However, since the petitioners had objected to the application, the Court felt it appropriate to pass orders on the application tomorrow.

The Court had earlier heard detailed arguments adduced by the petitioners.

The AG today argued that the only question to be considered is sending of messages using the platform of the State IT Mission (KSITM) to the data principals of SPARK database is for an illegitimate purpose or not. The allegation in the writ petition is that the data has been taken from the State Finance Department to the office of the CM and using these data, messages have been sent.

AG admitted that the messages in question have been sent by the KSITM as it was instructed to sent messages to the data principals of SPARK platform. He added that the KSITM is the nodal agency of the State for e-governance. The case put forth by the respondent is that the messages were not sent for any illegal purpose or used for any illegitimate purpose and is not. When the State is the custodian of data, not the finance department alone as alleged, there is no lifting of data from any source. Finance department deals with the calculation of salary, etc. whereas the other departments also use the data for other matters like Dearness Allowance (DA), etc.

"Benefits were not given by the Chief Minister...Normally, when communications are given, it is done by the government," orally asked the Court. In reply, the AG said that it is farfetched argument to say that the Chief Minister is separate from the State when he is the executive head of the government.

He pointed out that SPARK is not merely for salary but is a repository of Human Resources related services to the employees of the State.  He also submitted that sending of messages by Chief Minister before elections cannot be stated to be illegal unless there is a provision saying that sending such messages are illegal.

He read out from the State's counter affidavit:

"it is submitted that SPARK is a venture undertaken by the Government to digitalize all HR-related services and salary data of Government employees; and that SPARK is not merely an application for processing salaries, but a comprehensive human resource management platform intended to address all personnel matters of Government employees, including dissemination of information and updates relating to such matters, both individually and collectively."

It was pointed out that in 2024, the Chief Minister had made a statement in the Legislative Assembly that DA would be hiked and the same would be announced. The State's stand was that WhatsApp messages were sent after the formal decision in this regard was intended to inform and sensitize the employees about the decision and to motivate them to continue rendering their best service to the people. It was further stated that the messages were only part of the legitimate expectation between the employer and employee. He submitted even if it is with the Chief Minister's office, it cannot be termed illegal.

"You mined certain data. The data includes phone numbers of individuals, who maybe you have employed. And you are sending messages. Today it could be one message, tomorrow it could be another message. Do you have the power to mine and send those messages? If you are a State, you are entitled to mine data given to you for certain purposes? First question is now the message has gone from the Chief Minister's account. How can KSITM show it as Chief Minister's officer? KSITM is not under the Chief Minister. KSITM is under the State," Justice Bechu asked the AG.

"No. Only centre ID is shown as Chief Minister's account. It is under the Chief Minister's portfolio...KSITM, functioning under the Electronics & Information Technology Department, Government of Kerala, is the designated nodal agency for all e-governance-related activities in the State. KSITM has provided the technological infrastructure for WhatsApp-based messaging services as part of the broader initiative to establish a centralized notification hub for Government communications. In order to improve communication effectiveness and ensure timely dissemination of important information, the Government is utilizing a WhatsApp Business account and platform developed and operationalized by KSITM.This platform functions as a more interactive and responsive communication channel for various e-governance applications in the State, thereby advancing the objectives of good governance...The messages were delivered through the technological platform managed and operated by KSITM. This system hasbeen established pursuant to written policies and implemented in practice. The Chief Minister's Office, through these institutional mechanisms, has ensured the highest standards of administrative integrity and coordination," AG replied.

"I can solicit information. I can solicit These are all unsolicited messages that you are sending," asked the Court. To this the AG's answer was: "Once consent is obtained for purposes related to service, a message solely relating to service conditions such as revision of Dearness Allowance or HRA etc., can it be termed as an illegal or illegitimate purpose?"

The Court then asked: "There is a pleading that such messages have been sent even to judiciary. What is the DRA, what is the HRA that are you providing to the members of the higher judiciary? One, unsolicited message; two, mining...The entire body of persons who received the information or data are not before this Court. We are only considering whether it is legally proper to send these messages or not in the light of the privacy...That context, since you contend that these have been send only to persons who DRA and HRA has been granted."

AG replied: "It is admitted that without any filtering, these messages have been sent to all persons whose data is available in the SPARK database. They were sent without any filtering, without any manual classification or categorisation...I said all data principals whose data is available in the database of SPARK has been sent messages without any manual filtering or categorisation."

"That is why prima facie there can be an interference to right to privacy...That is the subtle distinction," the Court orally remarked.

Other arguments were also adduced by the AG on behalf on the State. He referred to the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and relied on 9-judge bench decision in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.), And Anr. v. Union of India And Ors. 

Towards the end of the hearing, the Court orally questioned the State: "Even an employee of IT Mission has no right to access this data...Where do the information relating to the payment of salary come into the personal mobile numbers of every employee? Which department sends that message...It goes through the SPARK, not by the IT Mission. That is why. So now, this details kept by SPARK, taken over by IT Mission to send some messages."

"No employee has accessed. It was through automatic messaging system...No, this was taken into the custody of the IT Mission as part of its initiative to collect database from other departments for the purpose of sharing..." AG began to answer.

Justice Bechu then said, "Your officer can come and explain. He can come. Probably he can throw some more light on...When can your officer come? Tomorrow? I'll consider tomorrow."

The matter is posted to Thursday (March 5) for further consideration.

The petition is moved by Advocates George Poonthottam (Sr.), Nisha George, A.L. Navaneeth Krishnan and Kavya Varma M.

Case No: WP(C) 7090/2026

Case Title: Dr. Rasheed Ahammed P. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.