Section 6 of the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014: Matters Not to Be Inquired into by the Competent Authority
Section 6 of the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014 (Act 17 of 2014) describes circumstances in which the Competent Authority may not entertain, reopen, or investigate a public interest disclosure. It addresses previously decided judicial matters, specified formal inquiries, complaints concerning events more than seven years old, and bona fide official decisions.
What does section 6 provide?
The heading of section 6 is "Matters not to be inquired by Competent Authority". The section sets out four distinct limitations on the proposed inquiry process. These must be read together with section 4 (public interest disclosure) and section 5 (receipt and inquiry).
6(1) - Issues already decided by a court or tribunal
Where a court or tribunal authorised to decide an issue has already determined it after considering the matter, the Competent Authority must not take notice of a disclosure to the extent that it seeks to reopen that decided issue. This restriction concerns the particular issue determined; it is not a blanket exclusion of every allegation mentioned in the same complaint.
6(2) - Formal public inquiries and commissions
The Competent Authority must not entertain or inquire into a disclosure where a formal and public inquiry has been ordered under the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 (Act 37 of 1850), or the matter has been referred for inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (Act 60 of 1952).
6(3) - Seven-year limitation
An allegation must not be investigated under this section if the complaint is made after seven years have expired from the date of the alleged action. The statutory period is measured from the alleged action, not from when the complainant discovered it.
6(4) - Bona fide official actions and discretion
The Act does not authorise the Competent Authority to question a bona fide action or bona fide exercise of administrative or statutory discretion performed by an employee in the discharge of duty. Bona fide means genuinely undertaken in good faith; the provision should not be read as protecting wilful abuse of power or corrupt conduct.
Practical meaning of the exclusions
- Has a competent court or tribunal already decided the same issue?
- Is a formal inquiry pending under either of the two specified Acts?
- Was the complaint made more than seven years after the alleged act?
- Does the allegation merely challenge an honest exercise of official duty or discretion?
These restrictions are framed for the Competent Authority defined in section 3. They do not themselves determine whether a complaint is admissible under a different law or under the existing Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers (PIDPI) Resolution.
Related legislation and official sources
The two formal-inquiry exclusions expressly refer to the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 and the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952. For the authoritative enacted wording, consult the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014 (official High Court-hosted text). For the latest verified governmental statement on commencement, see the Ministry of Personnel parliamentary reply dated 11 December 2025.
Frequently asked questions
Can a disclosure reopen a court-decided issue?
Under section 6(1), the Competent Authority cannot use the disclosure to reopen an issue already determined by an authorised court or tribunal after consideration of that issue.
What is the limitation period mentioned in section 6?
Section 6(3) specifies seven years from the alleged action. This is a provision of the enacted Act, which has not been verified as having commenced.
Are honest administrative decisions automatically misconduct?
No. Section 6(4) excludes questioning bona fide actions and bona fide exercises of administrative or statutory discretion in the discharge of duty.
Updated: 6 October 2026. This article is a legal-information guide, not a substitute for the text of applicable law or professional advice.