The Delhi High Court has set aside the CIC’s 2017 order directing Delhi University to disclose PM Modi’s 1978 BA degree records. Justice Sachin Datta upheld DU’s appeal citing privacy over political interest.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday cancelled the Central Information Commission’s (CIC) direction that had asked Delhi University (DU) to give information about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s degree.
Justice Sachin Datta allowed the appeals filed by Delhi University against the CIC’s 2017 order. Announcing the decision, the judge said:
“CIC order is set aside.”
The case started when an RTI applicant had asked for records of all students who completed their Bachelor of Arts (BA) course in 1978 from Delhi University. This was the same year in which PM Modi has mentioned in his election affidavit that he graduated with a BA in Political Science from DU.
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court Defers Verdict on DU’s RTI Case Over PM Modi’s Degree Records
The controversy over PM Modi’s degree came into focus in 2016 after former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal had demanded that the Prime Minister should “come clean about his educational degrees” and “make them public”.
Earlier in 2015, Neeraj Sharma had filed an RTI application asking for details of all BA degrees awarded by DU in 1978. But the University refused to give this information, saying that it was “private” and had “nothing to do with public interest”.
In December 2016, Sharma then approached the CIC. Information Commissioner Prof. M. Acharyulu passed an order telling DU to make public the register of students who had passed the BA programme in 1978.
But on January 23, 2017, DU challenged this order in the Delhi High Court. The Court issued notice to Sharma and also stayed the CIC order, after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that such an order would have “far-reaching adverse consequences” since all universities in India keep degree details of crores of students in a fiduciary capacity.
During the hearings, Solicitor General Mehta stressed that the right to seek information cannot be unlimited.
He said:
“In Puttaswamy case, there was one conclusion, unanimously passed, that right to privacy is protected under Article 21. Right to privacy supersedes right to know.”
He further argued that:
“Personal information cannot be sought under the RTI Act.”
Mehta also pointed out that public authorities have to carefully consider whether disclosure is in public interest.
ALSO READ: Arvind Kejriwal Appeals Against Gujarat High Court Verdict on PM Modi’s Degree Disclosure
He stated:
“The authority will have to decide that what is your interest. They say that in public interest it needs to be given, Somebody has passed out in 1978. It is not relatable to his public duty, you are wanting to use it for political purpose.”
Mehta also added that the RTI law should not be misused to trouble public officials. He told the court:
“Public authorities will not be able to exercise their purpose if such applications are entertained. People would be searching old documents, would be bogged down. RTI Act cannot be used as a tool to intimidate officers doing their duty.”
He further criticised the way RTI applicants were using the law, saying:
“You have made a mockery out of the RTI Act. If a public functionary is receiving thousands of applications, the minimum ₹10 charge as per statute will be required. You cannot have the luxury of filing RTI in the manner you like.”
On the other side, Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, appearing for the RTI applicant, opposed DU’s claim that it was holding the degree details in a fiduciary capacity.
He argued:
“If I were to tell the universe I need help of a scribe, I need to get my way around but I am visually challenged, this is fiduciary. Marks are not external information. If I go to the driving test, the pass or fail information is external. That fiduciary relation does not come with the evaluated paper with university.”
Hegde also highlighted that the information officer must weigh the good and bad of disclosure.
He said:
“The information officer has to see if the disclosure will cause public good or cause harm.”
Further, he argued that degree details are already accessible in public life and should not be treated as private.
He said:
“Degree related information is in public domain. Access to information has to be provided for ordinary man or celebrity.”
With this ruling, the Delhi High Court has effectively closed the CIC’s order that required DU to disclose records of PM Modi’s graduation batch. The case has once again underlined the clash between the right to information and the right to privacy in India’s legal framework.
Case Title:
University of Delhi v. Neeraj and other connected matters
Read Live Coverage:
Read Order:
Click Here to Read More Reports On PM degree
