Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Gujarat High Court on Friday 'set aside' an order of the Chief Information Commission (CIC) directing disclosure of the educational degree of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

While questioning the justification/the legal foundation on the basis of which the Commission had passed the abovesaid order, court also slammed Arvind Kejriwal for triggering the controversy of the educational degree of Prime Minister Modi through the RTI route when the same was already available in public domain.

Court held that there had been an indiscriminate misuse of the salutary provisions of the RTI Act in the present case "for the purposes not contemplated by the legislature while enacting the said Act".

Therefore, while setting aside the CIC order, the single-judge bench imposed costs of Rs. 25,000 on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal.

Court passed the order in an appeal filed by the Gujarat University challenging the CIC’s order of 2016. CIC had ordered Gujarat University to supply Modi’s MA degree obtained in 1983 and had also directed it to furnish his BA degree taken in 1978.

In a detailed order, the high court underscored the submissions made by the Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta who had vehemently called out Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's attempt to abuse salutary provisions of the Right To Information Act.

Court noted that SG Mehta had submitted that merely because Kejriwal happened to be the Chief Minister of a Union Territory, it was impermissible for the CIC to entertain his oral request in a second appeal where he was arrayed as a Respondent, to pass an adjunct order directing the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) for disclosure of the educational degree of the Prime Minister.

"...a sordid phenomenon has emerged in administration of the RTI Act, wherein, a genre of vested interest groups have emerged who claim themselves to be RTI activists. They flood the public authorities across the spectrum with RTI applications, claiming themselves to be the crusaders of transparency," SG Mehta had asserted before the high court.

The Solicitor General had also highlighted that such vested interest groups and persons have created a new public post for themselves and have anointed themselves with the title of ‘RTI Activists’ and ‘Public Interest Litigator’ and they try to exert control in an attempt to have dominance over the matters of public administration and on public at large.

Unwarranted controversy was sought to be created by the Respondent No. 2(Arvind Kejariwal) to generate media hype and to derive publicity from the same at the cost of someone else’s reputation, SG Mehta had contended.

Court also highlighted that SG Mehta had submitted before the court that Gujarat University (the petitioner) had no objection in making Prime Minister's degree public, which was later made available in public domain as well. 

It was the University's contention which sought stay on CIC's order that if the order is not stayed the University will be flooded with such 'third party' applications.

Taking the submissions into account, the high court opined that there was no valid ground of public interest for Delhi Chief Minister to seek Prime Minister's degree through RTI.

Case Title: Gujarat University v. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)

Statue: The Right to Information Act