'Purpose limitation' is a key principle for the ethical use of government-collected data. Discuss with reference to recent controversies around SIR data usage for welfare scheme eligibility.

Purpose limitation means data collected for a stated lawful purpose must not be reused for unrelated ends. Codified in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 [4], it is now central to the dispute over using Special Intensive Revision (SIR) outcomes to decide welfare eligibility.

Why purpose limitation matters in governance

• Consent integrity: citizens share data for a declared purpose; silent reuse defeats the consent on which collection rested [4].
• Checks function creep: a purity-of-rolls exercise must not mutate into a de facto eligibility filter for unrelated benefits.
• Accountability: it forces each authority to justify action under its own statute, not borrowed data.

SIR's purpose is strictly electoral

• SIR is an ECI exercise to remove ineligible and duplicate entries, with house-to-house enumeration, draft publication and a claims-and-objections window [3].
• Eligibility is scrutinised under Article 326 read with Sections 16 and 19, Representation of the People Act, 1950 — voting age, ordinary residence, disqualification [2].
• In the Bihar SIR judgment (2026 INSC 564, 27 May 2026), the Supreme Court upheld SIR as lawful and proportionate, mandated show-cause notice and reasoned speaking orders before deletion, and held the ECI cannot adjudicate citizenship — that lies with the Union under the Citizenship Act [1].

The West Bengal controversy

• Petitioners allege persons deleted from rolls were denied PDS, the Annapurna scheme and Backward Caste certificates; on 17 July 2026 the Court issued notice to the ECI, State government and Chief Electoral Officer [6].
• Yet PDS entitlements flow from the National Food Security Act, 2013, whose criteria are independent of the electoral roll [5].
• Alleged non-publication of the appeals SOP and delays in the 18 claim tribunals compound the harm for poor and rural households [6].

Electoral hygiene and welfare entitlement are distinct legal universes. Governments should firewall roll data, verify beneficiaries against scheme-specific criteria, and publish grievance SOPs — so that a name struck off a voter list never becomes a ration denied.