NEW DELHI: Amid controversy over the Modi government giving "snooping powers" to investigative agencies , a 2013 RTI reply reveals that around 7,500-9,000 phones and 300-500 email accounts were intercepted every month under the then UPA government.The information was revealed by the ministry of home affairs in response to an RTI query filed by Prosenjit Mondal."On an average, between 7,500 to 9,000 orders for interception of telephones and 300 to 500 orders for interception of emails are issued by Central Government per month," the reply dated August 6, 2013 states.The reply also discloses the list of ten central and state agencies that are authorised for lawful interception, which include Intelligence Bureau (IB), Narcotics Control Bureau Enforcement Directorate (ED), Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), National Investigation Agency (NIA), Cabinet Secretariat (RAW) and the Commissioner of Police, Delhi.Earlier today, the government reiterated that the notification on surveillance is a reiteration of the order that was amended by the UPA government in 2008, when A Raja was the minister of communication and information technology and Shivraj Patil was the home minister.The clarification also added that the rules under Section 69 of IT Act [Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules] were framed in 2009, during the tenure of Raja and then home minister P Chidambaram It was in 2011 when the home ministry under Chidambaram issued the standard operating procedure (SOP) for interception, handling, use, copying, storage and destruction of messages, telephonic intercepts, emails under section 5(2) of Telegraph Act and Section 69 of IT Act, the statement adds.Opposition parties on Friday had launched a scathing attack against the government for its move to authorise 10 Central agencies to intercept any information on computers, describing it as "unconstitutional and an assault on fundamental rights" and demanded its immediate withdrawal.Defending the order, the government said the authorisation was given under 2009 rules and that the opposition was playing with the national security by "making a mountain where even a molehill doesn't exist".