- NITI Aayog's framework dated October 14, 2026 asks MeitY to audit data centre operators' claims. MediaNama reported MeitY has said it keeps no official capacity data.
- The framework is non-binding guidance. It asks for efficiency measurements at design stage and after opening, using the same boundaries.
- Buyers can ask providers now for the efficiency ratios, approval status and a written map of data-protection roles.
A check is only as good as the records behind it. India's new data centre framework gives the checking job to one ministry. That ministry has said it holds no official data on data centre capacity.
What the framework proposes
A framework from NITI Aayog's Frontier Tech Hub, dated October 14, 2026, sets out how India should judge data centre projects. One idea is a central audit. MeitY, the IT ministry, would lead it. It would inspect operators' claims from time to time, MediaNama reported.
The framework also asks each state to publish an approval matrix. Think of it as one list. It shows every clearance a project needs, who issues it and how long it takes.
The document calls itself guidance. It says it is meant to "support decision-making". It does not aim to add a layer of regulation. Nobody is bound by it yet.
Two statements side by side
MediaNama reported MeitY as saying: "Officially, no data is maintained in MeitY regarding the capacity of Data Centres." MediaNama set this beside the audit proposal. The report does not date the remark. It does not say MeitY made it about this framework.
The framework adds a caution of its own. Its disclaimer says the data it used came from secondary sources.
The framework does not say the audit depends on capacity records. That link is our inference. An auditor might start with little official data on what exists. Capacity is only one kind of record, so the gap may be wider or narrower.
The lesson is practical. Promises on green power, water use and resilience mean little until someone can check them. Until then, buyers must do part of that checking themselves.
That 2020 draft also proposed a single-window, time-bound clearance. MediaNama says these ideas carry through into the new framework.
How efficiency would be measured
The framework leans on three ratios: power, water and carbon usage effectiveness. Each compares a site's total electricity, water or emissions with what its computing equipment alone uses.
States would test these ratios at design stage against published Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) standards. They would then require measurement after the site opens, "using the same boundaries". That phrase matters. Two sites can only be compared if both draw the line around the facility in the same place.
The framework also asks three bodies to set shared rules. They are the Bureau of Energy Efficiency, BIS and MeitY. They would "standardise PUE, WUE and CUE measurement boundaries, reporting and verification". The ask suggests those common rules are still to be written.
Who answers for what
Condition 14 deals with responsibility. States must map who owns the facility and its IT. They must also map who controls the workloads and who the customer is. The list names a data fiduciary or processor, among other roles.
Those last two terms come from the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. A fiduciary decides why personal data is processed. A processor handles it for the fiduciary.
The Centre would also keep a "national legal-responsibility matrix". The aim is simple. When something fails in a shared facility, each duty should have a named owner.
A moving state picture
MediaNama noted that the framework does not mention state policies, though several exist. Uttar Pradesh's cabinet cleared a Data Centre Policy 2026 in July. It replaced the 2021 policy. Gujarat launched its Viksit Gujarat Data Centre Policy 2026-29 on July 9. Karnataka introduced a Sustainable Data Centre Policy 2026-31 in September.
The Indian Express reported that the government seems to be working on a separate data centre policy. Its draft and timeline are not public.
What to ask your team
Nothing here binds an operator today. But the framework shows what a careful buyer can ask for now.
First, ask each provider for the three efficiency ratios, both at design stage and after opening. Ask where it draws the measurement boundary.
Second, ask which state approvals the site holds and which are still pending.
Third, ask for a written map of who is the data fiduciary and who is the processor in your contract.
Fourth, ask whether each incentive or green-power claim cites the notification behind it.
Until it is clear what records an audit would draw on, a claim you have asked for in writing is worth more than one you have only heard.
Produced by the WebPulse Newsroom with AI assistance from the original reporting credited below, and checked against that source by our editorial review. How we use AI.
Original reporting: MediaNama.
