No more ‘every Tom, Dick, and Harry’: Govt curbs who can order online content removals after X’s lawsuit

After Musk’s challenge, India tightens IT Rules: only top officers can order content takedowns

The Government of India has amended the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, in what’s being seen as a direct response to the legal tussle with Elon Musk’s social media platform X (formerly Twitter).

Effective November 15, 2025, the new rules aim to rein in the sweeping powers previously held by thousands of lower-level officials to issue takedown orders, a long-standing complaint by social media intermediaries about arbitrary and excessive censorship.

The backstory: X vs Government of India

For months, X and the Centre have been locked in a high-stakes legal battle over Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, the provision governing how the government can direct online platforms to remove or restrict access to content.

X had argued before the Karnataka High Court that the rule effectively empowered 'every Tom, Dick, and Harry' in the bureaucracy to demand takedowns. The company’s legal counsel alleged that thousands of officials across central and state agencies were issuing orders that bypassed the more formal process laid out under Section 69A of the IT Act, which requires due process and senior-level oversight.

Though X eventually lost the case, the amendments notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) now appear to address several of the concerns raised in that lawsuit, especially around who can issue takedown orders and on what grounds.

What’s changing: Only senior officers can issue takedown notices

Under the revised Rule 3(1)(d), the power to issue a content removal request has been narrowly restricted to senior government officials.

For central and state governments, the notice can now only come from an officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary or equivalent.
For police authorities, it can only be issued by a specially authorised officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General (DIG).
This marks a clear departure from the earlier framework, where officials at much lower ranks, often at the district or state department level, could demand content takedowns with little oversight.

The intent, as MeitY officials explain, is to eliminate arbitrary or politically motivated misuse, while ensuring that only qualified and accountable decision-makers handle sensitive online moderation issues.

‘Reasoned intimations’ to replace vague notices

A major procedural reform in the new rules is the requirement for all takedown orders to be “reasoned intimations.”

Every order must now clearly state:

The legal provision invoked,
The exact nature of the alleged violation,
The URL or electronic identifier of the content to be removed, and
A specific justification for why the removal is necessary.

This change replaces the earlier practice of sending vague or broad notifications that left platforms guessing what content to act on. The government hopes this will make the process more transparent, auditable, and fair, while also protecting intermediaries from being accused of overcompliance.

Monthly oversight: A built-in review mechanism

In another first, all takedown orders issued under the new rule will undergo a monthly review by a senior officer not below the rank of Secretary in the relevant government department.

This oversight mechanism is designed to ensure that content removal actions remain necessary, proportionate, and lawful, while also allowing for periodic course corrections if overreach occurs.

This regular review will serve as a safeguard against 'mission creep,' the tendency of censorship powers to expand quietly over time.