The Delhi High Court has adjourned to December the appeals seeking disclosure of information about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s bachelor’s degree, after the Bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya could not take up the matter on Tuesday for want of time.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday adjourned to December the appeals seeking disclosure of information relating to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s bachelor’s degree, as the Division Bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya could not take up the matter because of paucity of time.
The appeals were listed on September 29, 2026, the date the Bench had fixed at the previous hearing. No arguments were heard, and no direction on the merits was passed. This report is based on the court’s listing and reports of the hearing, and the exact date in December has not been confirmed here.
The appeals
The appeals have been filed by RTI activist Neeraj Sharma, Aam Aadmi Party leader Sanjay Singh and advocate Mohd Irshad. They challenge the judgment of a Single Judge of the High Court dated August 25, 2025, which set aside a direction of the Central Information Commission (CIC) on disclosure of records about the Prime Minister’s degree. Delhi University, which is opposing the disclosure, was represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
ALSO READ: Appeals Filed in Delhi High Court Seeking Disclosure of PM Modi’s Degree Details
Background of the case
The dispute began with an RTI application filed by Neeraj. On December 21, 2016, the CIC allowed inspection of the records of students who cleared the BA examination in 1978, the year in which the Prime Minister is stated to have passed it. Delhi University challenged that direction in the High Court, saying that the information was personal and that it had no objection to producing the records before the Court.
On August 25, 2025, a Single Judge, deciding six petitions together, allowed the University’s challenge and set aside the CIC’s direction. The Single Judge held that holding public office does not by itself make all of a person’s personal information open to public disclosure, ruled out any implicit public interest in the information sought, observed that educational qualifications were not a statutory requirement for the public offices concerned, and described the CIC’s approach as “thoroughly misconceived”. The Single Judge also said the RTI Act exists to promote transparency in government functioning and not to feed sensationalism.
The appeals were filed in November 2025. When they first came up, a Bench of Chief Justice Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that they had been filed beyond the limitation period and said that it would first examine the delay before the merits, and gave the University time to file its objections. The appellants say the appeals raise the questions whether the exemption under Section 8 of the RTI Act applies and, if it does, whether disclosure should still be allowed in the larger public interest.
ALSO READ: PM Modi’s Degree Row| Only to Sensationalise: Delhi University Tells High Court
The previous hearing
On August 20, 2026, a Bench of Chief Justice Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia fixed September 29 for hearing the appeals. According to the ANI report, a passover was sought on behalf of the appellants at the outset, and the Solicitor General said the matter could be heard on another day and asked for an early date. The Bench said it would take up the matter on September 29, and told the Solicitor General, when he asked again for an earlier date, that it had checked its calendar.
Why it matters
The adjournment means that the appeals, which were filed in November 2025 and have so far dealt with the delay in filing, will not be heard on merits before December. The Division Bench has not yet decided the questions the appellants have raised, and has not indicated a view on the Single Judge’s reasoning.
The listing was affected by the Bench’s workload on the day, and it does not reflect any finding on the parties’ arguments. The appellants’ contentions and the University’s position remain as recorded in the earlier hearings.
Bench: Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Delhi High Court (Division Bench)
Date of Listing: September 29, 2026
Appellants: Neeraj Sharma, Sanjay Singh and Mohd Irshad. Respondent: Delhi University and others