Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court reserved its verdict in a plea challenging the Central Information Commission's (CIC) refusal to disclose details regarding Prime Minister Narendra Modi's bachelor's degree. The bench of Justice Sachin Datta, after hearing arguments from both parties, reserved the judgment in this matter. 

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing Delhi University (DU), argued that the CIC order should be set aside. However, he affirmed that DU had no objection to presenting the degree before the court. He remarked, “The university has no objection to showing the record to the court. A Bachelor of Arts degree from 1978 exists”. 

On February 11, DU contended that it held such information in a fiduciary capacity and that mere curiosity, in the absence of public interest, did not warrant seeking personal information under the RTI Act. The university claimed that the RTI Act had been trivialized by demands for records of all students who graduated in 1978, including the Prime Minister.

The RTI applicant argued that awarding degrees was a public act and fell under the RTI's purview. He asserted that DU, as a public authority, could not deny disclosure on the basis of privacy or fiduciary concerns. He further emphasized that a degree was a qualification granted by the state and did not constitute private information.

Farasat highlighted that the RTI Act did not consider the applicant’s identity or intent, placing the burden on authorities to justify any exemption. Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing another RTI applicant, Neeraj, supported this stance, citing election laws that required candidates to disclose their educational qualifications.

In its plea against the CIC order, DU labeled it "arbitrary" and "untenable in law", asserting that the requested information was third-party personal data. The university maintained that the CIC's directive lacked legal justification and required DU to allow the inspection of records containing student names, roll numbers, fathers' names, and marks obtained in 1978.

For University: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta with Advocates Rajat Nair, Dhruv Pandey, Akshaja Singh and Alok Dubey
For Respondent: Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde with Advocates Rishikesh Kumar, Sheenu Priya and Aman Kumar
For Interveners: Senior Advocate Trideep Pias with Advocate Seema Misra
Case Title: University Of Delhi v Neeraj (W.P.(C) 600/2017)
[With Inputs from Financial Express]