The Delhi High Court on Monday overturned the Central Information Commission's (CIC) order to disclose information related to Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi's degree.
The appeals filed by Delhi University (DU) challenging a 2017 CIC order directing the university to provide information regarding Modi's degree to a Right to Information (RTI) applicant were granted by Justice Sachin Datta. "The CIC order is set aside," the single judge said, pronouncing the verdict.
In 1978, the year PM Modi is said to have graduated from Delhi University (DU) with a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in political science, the RTI applicant sought records of students who had passed the BA course. The issue came to the limelight after former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in 2016 asked PM Modi to “come clean about his educational degrees” and “make them public.”
PM Modi had sworn in his election affidavit that he graduated from DU with a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in Political Science in the year 1978.
Neeraj Sharma had filed a Right to Information (RTI) request for all 1978 Delhi University BA degrees. The university denied disclosing the degree-related data, claiming that it was "private" and had "nothing to do with the public interest." Sharma moved the CIC to reject the university's response in December 2016. Prof. M. Acharyulu, the Information Commissioner, issued an order directing DU to make the list of students who completed the Bachelor of Arts program in 1978 public in the register. The university filed a High Court challenge to the CIC order on January 23, 2017. Following Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta's arguments that the order has far-reaching adverse consequences and that all universities in the country that hold degree details of crores of students in a fiduciary capacity, the Court issued notice to Sharma and stayed the order in January 2017. SG Mehta, representing DU, made the argument that the right to know is not an unrestricted right during the hearing. " In the Puttaswamy case, everyone came to the same conclusion: Article 21 protects the right to privacy. "Right to know takes precedence over right to privacy," he added. Mehta also said that the RTI Act doesn't allow for the request of personal information. "The authority will have to decide what your interest is.They say that it must be given in the public interest; in 1978, someone died. "You want to use it for political purposes; it is not related to his public duty," SG stated. Mehta also argued that officers cannot be intimidated by the RTI Act. "Public authorities will not be able to exercise their purpose if such applications are entertained.People would be searching old documents and would be bogged down. The RTI Act cannot be used as a tool to intimidate officers doing their duty."
SG Mehta also said to the RTI applicants that they are making a mockery of the RTI Act and defended the ₹10 charge for applications.
"You have made fun of the Right to Information Act. A public official will be required to pay the statutory minimum of 10 if they receive thousands of applications. You cannot have the luxury of filing RTI in the manner you like," he submitted.
For the RTI applicant, Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde challenged DU's claim that it holds student degree information in a fiduciary capacity. "This is fiduciary if I were to tell the universe that I need the assistance of a scribe to get around because I am visually impaired. Marks are not information from the outside. If I go to the driving test, the pass or fail information is external.The evaluated university paper does not include that fiduciary relationship," Hegde argued. Hegde added that the information officer must determine whether the disclosure will benefit or harm the public. "All degree-related information is available to the public. "Either ordinary people or celebrities need to have access to information," he stated.
You must be logged in to post a comment.