Skip to main content
Home/DPDP Act/Chapter V — Data Protection Board of India/Section 23 — Proceedings of Board
DPDP Act, 2023 · Chapter V · Section 23 of 44

Section 23: Proceedings of Board

Section 23 sets how the Board conducts its own meetings and authenticates its orders, and includes a practical safety net: minor procedural defects or vacancies don't automatically invalidate what the Board has already done.

In force since 13 November 2025Reviewed September 2026
StatusIn force
Chapter V · Data Protection Board of India

Quick summary

In plain terms: The Board follows a prescribed procedure for its meetings, including by digital means, and authenticates its orders, directions and instruments in a prescribed manner. No act or proceeding of the Board is invalid merely because of a vacancy or defect in its constitution, a defect in a Member's appointment, or a procedural irregularity that doesn't affect the merits of the case. When the Chairperson can't discharge their functions due to absence, illness or another cause, the senior-most Member takes over until the Chairperson resumes.

What Section 23 says

  • Sub-section (1) — the Board shall observe such procedure in regard to the holding of and transaction of business at its meetings, including by digital means, and authenticate its orders, directions and instruments, in such manner as may be prescribed.
  • Sub-section (2) — no act or proceeding of the Board shall be invalid merely by reason of (a) any vacancy in, or any defect in the constitution of, the Board; (b) any defect in the appointment of a person acting as the Chairperson or another Member of the Board; or (c) any irregularity in the Board's procedure that doesn't affect the merits of the case.
  • Sub-section (3) — when the Chairperson is unable to discharge her functions owing to absence, illness or any other cause, the senior-most Member shall discharge the Chairperson's functions until the date the Chairperson resumes her duties.

Breaking it down

Digital-first is built into the Board's meeting procedure from the outset. Sub-section (1) explicitly contemplates meetings “including by digital means,” consistent with the Act's broader emphasis (echoed in Section 28(1)) on the Board functioning as a digital office.

Sub-section (2) exists specifically to prevent technicalities from undermining substantive decisions. Its three protections cover different scenarios: a vacancy or constitutional defect in the Board itself, a defect in how a particular individual was appointed, and a procedural irregularity in how a specific matter was handled — in each case, the Board's action stays valid as long as the underlying merits weren't affected. This is a standard and important safeguard for any multi-member statutory body, since without it, a single appointment technicality could retroactively unravel completed proceedings.

Continuity of leadership is built in via sub-section (3). The senior-most-Member succession rule means the Board doesn't grind to a halt or lack a functioning head just because the Chairperson is temporarily unavailable — whether from illness, absence, or otherwise.

Why this section matters

A regulator that could be paralysed, or have all its past decisions cast into doubt, by a minor appointment defect or a temporary leadership gap would be an unreliable one. Section 23 is a structural safeguard ensuring the Board's decisions carry lasting authority even through ordinary administrative hiccups.

Real-world example

Example

Why the validity safeguard matters in practice

Suppose a technical defect is later discovered in how one Member was originally appointed to the Board, years after that Member participated in dozens of enforcement decisions.

  • Without sub-section (2) — every decision that Member participated in could potentially be challenged and unravelled based purely on the appointment defect, regardless of whether the decisions themselves were sound.
  • With sub-section (2)(b) in place — those past decisions remain valid on their merits — the appointment defect doesn't retroactively invalidate the Board's completed work.
  • Separately, if the Chairperson falls ill for an extended period — sub-section (3) ensures the senior-most Member can keep the Board functioning by discharging the Chairperson's duties in the interim.

Who needs to care about this section

  • Parties with matters before the Board — sub-section (2) means a procedural irregularity that doesn't affect the merits generally isn't grounds to challenge a Board decision.
  • The Board's own administrative staff — responsible for following the prescribed meeting and authentication procedures under sub-section (1).

Common questions

Can a Board decision be challenged just because of a minor procedural irregularity?
Not if the irregularity doesn't affect the merits of the case — sub-section (2)(c) specifically protects against that kind of challenge.
What happens if the Board Chairperson is unavailable for an extended period?
The senior-most Member discharges the Chairperson's functions under sub-section (3), until the Chairperson is able to resume their duties.
Does the Board have to meet in person?
No — sub-section (1) explicitly allows for meetings by digital means, consistent with the Board's broader digital-office design.