PM Modi degree controversy: RTI’s purpose not to satisfy curiosity, DU tells HC

Tushar Mehta representing Delhi university mentioned that RTI law should not be misused to request disclosures unrelated to transparency and accountability of public institutions.

In a plea related to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s degree, the Delhi University (DU) on Monday, January 13 told the Delhi High Court that the Right to Information (RTI) Act is not intended to satisfy curiosity.

This statement was made by solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the university before Justice Sachin Datta. He also mentioned that the RTI law should not be misused to request disclosures unrelated to the transparency and accountability of public institutions.

The court was hearing a 2017 plea filed by DU challenging an order from the central information commission (CIC) that directed the university in Delhi to allow an inspection of records for students who passed the BA program in 1978, the same year PM Modi was said to have completed the degree.

The CIC’s order had been stayed since the first hearing on January 24, 2017.

The solicitor general emphasized that individuals can request their degree or marksheet under the RTI Act, but Section 8(1)(e) exempts disclosure of such information to third parties.

As reported by LiveLaw, solicitor general representing Delhi university also contended that the CIC’s order was contrary to established legal principles, suggesting that if the court accepted the request for information from 1978, it could lead to similar requests for subsequent years, given that the university has records dating back to 1922.

Also Read
Guj HC to hear Kejriwal’s review petition on PM Modi’s degree on July 7

Activist seeks Delhi University exam results from year of PM Modi’s graduation

The controversy began when activist Neeraj Kumar sought results of all students who appeared for the BA exam in 1978, including their roll numbers, names, marks and pass/fail status. Delhi University’s central public information officer (CPIO) had denied the request, citing the information as “third-party” data.

Kumar then appealed to the CIC, which also ruled in favour of disclosing the information.

In its 2016 ruling, the CIC argued that educational records are public domain, and the information about students’ results should be disclosed, as universities are public bodies and their records are part of public documents.

At the 2017 hearing, Delhi University had no issue providing the total number of students who appeared, passed, or failed, but opposed disclosing detailed personal information such as roll numbers, names, and marks, claiming such details were exempt under the RTI Act as they were held in fiduciary capacity.

The matter will be heard again later this month.