Skip to main content
DPDP Compliance
Home/DPDP Act/Chapter V — Data Protection Board of India/Section 21 — Disqualifications for Appointment and Continuation as Chairperson and Members of Board
DPDP Act, 2023 · Chapter V · Section 21 of 44

Section 21: Disqualifications for Appointment and Continuation as Chairperson and Members of Board

Section 21 sets the specific grounds that disqualify someone from becoming, or continuing as, Chairperson or a Member — insolvency, moral-turpitude convictions, incapacity, conflicts of interest, and abuse of position — and guarantees a hearing before removal.

In force since 13 November 2025Reviewed September 2026
Back to the Full DPDP Act GuideNext: Section 22 — Resignation by Members and Filling of Vacancy
StatusIn force
Chapter V · Data Protection Board of India

Quick summary

In plain terms: A person is disqualified from being appointed and continuing as Chairperson or a Member if they've been adjudged insolvent, convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude, become physically or mentally incapable of acting, acquired a financial or other interest likely to prejudicially affect their functions, or so abused their position that continuing would be prejudicial to public interest. A Chairperson or Member can't be removed without being given an opportunity to be heard.

What Section 21 says

  • Sub-section (1) — a person is disqualified from being appointed, and from continuing, as Chairperson or a Member if she:
  • Clause (1)(a) — has been adjudged insolvent.
  • Clause (1)(b) — has been convicted of an offence which, in the Central Government's opinion, involves moral turpitude.
  • Clause (1)(c) — has become physically or mentally incapable of acting as a Member.
  • Clause (1)(d) — has acquired financial or other interest likely to prejudicially affect her functions as a Member.
  • Clause (1)(e) — has so abused her position as to render her continuance in office prejudicial to public interest.
  • Sub-section (2) — the Chairperson or a Member shall not be removed from office by the Central Government unless she has been given an opportunity of being heard in the matter.

Breaking it down

This section does two jobs at once: it lists the specific grounds (sub-section 1) that disqualify someone both from initial appointment and from continuing once appointed, and it guarantees procedural fairness (sub-section 2) before any actual removal.

The five grounds mix financial, criminal, capacity and conduct-based disqualifications. Insolvency and moral-turpitude convictions are objective, easily verifiable triggers; incapacity, conflict of interest and abuse of position require more judgment to establish, but all five serve the same underlying goal — keeping the Board's leadership free of compromising circumstances.

These grounds apply at two different moments: appointment and continuation. Someone already disqualified under sub-section (1) at the outset can't be appointed in the first place; someone who develops a disqualifying circumstance after appointment (say, a moral-turpitude conviction arising during their term) becomes disqualified from continuing.

Removal still requires due process, even where a disqualifying ground exists. Sub-section (2)'s hearing requirement means a disqualification isn't automatically self-executing — the Central Government still has to give the Chairperson or Member an opportunity to be heard before removing them, protecting against summary or arbitrary removal.

Why this section matters

An adjudicatory body's legitimacy depends on its leadership being free of compromising financial interests, criminal history involving dishonesty, or abuse of office. Section 21 sets objective and conduct-based standards for that, while sub-section (2)'s hearing guarantee ensures those standards aren't used as a pretext for removing a Member without fair process.

Real-world example

Example

How a disqualification situation might actually unfold

Suppose a sitting Board Member acquires a substantial financial stake in a company currently under Board investigation.

  • This falls under clause (d) — a financial interest likely to prejudicially affect the Member's functions, since it creates a direct conflict with impartially handling that investigation.
  • The Central Government can move to remove the Member on this ground — but under sub-section (2), it must first give the Member an opportunity to be heard — for instance, to explain the circumstances or divest the conflicting interest — before any removal takes effect.

Who needs to care about this section

  • Board Chairperson and Members — these are the standards their own continued tenure is measured against.
  • Organisations with matters before the Board — understanding these safeguards is relevant to confidence in the Board's impartiality.

Common questions

Can a Board Member be removed without any hearing?
No — sub-section (2) requires that the Chairperson or a Member be given an opportunity to be heard before removal from office.
Do these disqualifications apply only at the time of appointment?
No — sub-section (1) applies both to initial appointment and to continuing in office, so a disqualifying circumstance arising after appointment can also trigger disqualification.
What counts as an offence “involving moral turpitude”?
The Act leaves this determination to the Central Government's opinion under clause (b), rather than defining a fixed list of qualifying offences.

Related sections

Section 22 — Resignation by Members and Filling of Vacancy

Continue to the next section in sequence.

Read Section 22

Section 20 — Salary, Allowances and Term of Office

Go back to the previous section.

Read Section 20

Chapter V — Data Protection Board of India

See every section in this chapter together.

View the chapter

Full DPDP Act Guide

Back to the overview page, with the complete section-by-section guide.

View all 44 sections