Delhi High Court Refuses To Advance Hearing Of RTI Case On PM Modi's BA Degree

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to advance the hearing of a case related to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's academic degree. The matter is listed for hearing on October 13.

Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing an application seeking early hearing of the plea moved by Delhi University in 2017 challenging an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the varsity to allow inspection of records of the students who had passed BA programme in 1978, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is also stated to have cleared the examination. The order was stayed on the first date of hearing on January 24 in 2017.

The court issued notice on the early hearing application filed by RTI Activist Neeraj Kumar. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde representing Kumar told court that the matter has been long pending thereby warranting an early hearing.

“The matter is listed in October. Take it from me, it will be disposed of then, provided I continue in the roster. It doesn’t impress why it (preponing) should be done. Sympathies apart… We’ll just say issue notice. List on the date already fixed,” Justice Prasad said.

About the Controversy

RTI Activist Neeraj Kumar had filed an RTI application seeking result of all the students who appeared in BA in 1978 alongwith their roll number, name, marks and result pass or failed.

The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the DU denied the information on the ground it qualified as "third party information". The RTI activist then filed an appeal before the CIC.

CIC in the order passed in 2016 said: "Having examined the case, the synonymous legislations and previous decisions, the Commission states that matters relating to education of a student (current/former) fall under the public domain and hence order the relevant public authority to disclose information accordingly."

The CIC had observed that every University is a public body and that all degree related information is available in the varsity's private register, which is a public document.

Before the High Court, Delhi University, which was represented by Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta - he is Solicitor General at present - on the first date of hearing in 2017, contended that it had no difficulty in providing the information sought on the total number of students who appeared, passed or failed in the said examination.

However, on the prayer seeking details of the results of all students along with roll numbers, names with father names and marks, the varsity argued that such information was exempted from disclosure. It was argued that the same contained personal information of all the students who had perused in BA in 1978, and that the information was held in fiduciary capacity.

After the order was stayed by Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva, the matter has been listed before five judges over the years due to routine changes in roster.

In one of the hearings in February 2019 before Justice Anup J. Bhambhani, the matter was clubbed with a batch of petitions raising the question regarding interpretation of Sections 8(1)(e) and (j) of the RTI Act.

The court had noted that the provision lays-down "exemptions from disclosure of information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship and of personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of an individual."

The information sought in all the cases relates to the results of examinations, details of the results, educational qualifications and other related matters pertaining to students.

"Needless to add that while considering the interpretation of the aforesaid two statutory provisions, the court will also look at other related provisions of law, as may be relevant and material for the decision," Justice Bhambhani had recorded in the order.

Title: University of Delhi v. Neeraj Kumar