Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal has taken a significant legal step by appealing to the Gujarat High Court against the quashing of a Central Information Commission (CIC) order. This order had initially directed Gujarat University to search for and provide information regarding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s educational degrees.
The legal contention arose when, on March 31, Justice Biren Vaishnav of the Gujarat High Court set aside the CIC order. The court’s decision was based on the interpretation that the educational degrees of a student are considered personal information, which is exempt from disclosure under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. This ruling led to Kejriwal’s appeal, especially after his review plea was rejected by Justice Vaishnav in November.
In challenging this verdict, Kejriwal has raised several critical points. He contends that Justice Vaishnav erred in imposing costs on him, as he had not directly sought the details of PM Modi’s degree. Instead, Kejriwal had only written a letter to the Chief Information Commissioner, who then, on his own accord (suo motu), ordered the university to disclose the details.
Kejriwal’s appeal strongly emphasizes the importance of voter information, arguing that the right to vote becomes meaningless if voters are not informed about the educational qualifications and antecedents of candidates. He states,
“It is said that all the information about candidates contesting elections must be made available in the public domain as exposure to public scrutiny was one of the surest means to glance the democratic governing system and have competent legislators. Every citizen has a fundamental right to know the educational qualification of a candidate.”
Furthermore, the appeal references the Representation of People Act, 1951, which mandates that electoral candidates must disclose true information. The Act stipulates that if a candidate is found to have disclosed false information, they are liable to disqualification.
“Thus, every candidate has to disclose his educational qualification to subserve the right to information of the voters,”
the appeal further reads.
Kejriwal also pointed out an inconsistency during the hearing of the matter. He noted that the university claimed the degree copy was available online and in the public domain. However, he observed that no such document is available on the university’s website. The only document present is a PDF file of the office register, which Kejriwal described as “cryptic.”
This appeal by Kejriwal brings to the forefront significant issues regarding transparency and the public’s right to information, especially in the context of the educational background of public figures and electoral candidates. It highlights the ongoing debate between personal privacy and public accountability, particularly in democratic processes and the integrity of elected officials. As the judicial proceedings unfold, this case is expected to attract considerable attention and potentially influence the norms surrounding the disclosure of personal information of public figures in India.
Also read-Delhi High Court’s Response To Rahul Gandhi’s Controversial Speech (lawchakra.in)
