The Delhi High Court on Tuesday questioned RTI activist Neeraj Sharma on whether his request under the RTI Act for records of students who cleared the Bachelor of Arts (BA) course from Delhi University (DU) in 1978—the year in which Prime Minister Narendra Modi is said to have graduated in political science—served any public interest.

Justice Sachin Datta raised this query after DU challenged a 2017 order by the Central Information Commission (CIC), which had directed the university to disclose the requested information.

The CIC's ruling effectively meant permitting the inspection of PM Modi's degree records—a politically sensitive issue, as his opponents have frequently alleged that his educational credentials are fabricated.

"Is there any public interest in seeking these details?" the Court asked Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, who represented Sharma.

During the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for DU, argued that the university holds students' degree records in a fiduciary capacity and is, therefore, not obligated to disclose them under the RTI Act.

He also questioned the legitimacy of the RTI applicants on whose plea the CIC had passed the order and pointed out that they had not paid the requisite RTI fees.

After hearing both sides, the Court scheduled the next hearing for February 19. It also raised concerns regarding the non-payment of fees and the fiduciary claim made by DU.

"If you succeed on the 'fiduciary capacity' argument, you are through," Justice Datta told Hegde.

The controversy dates back to 2016 when Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal urged PM Modi to publicly disclose his educational degrees. Following this, Aam Aadmi Party supporter Neeraj Sharma filed an RTI request with DU seeking details of Modi’s degree.

While Modi had stated in his election affidavit that he graduated from DU in 1978 with a BA in Political Science, the university refused to disclose the records, calling them "private" and irrelevant to public interest. Sharma then moved the CIC, which ruled in December 2016 that DU should make public its register of students who graduated in 1978.

DU challenged this order before the Delhi High Court in January 2017, which stayed the CIC directive after SG Mehta argued that the ruling could have broad implications for all universities that maintain student records in a fiduciary capacity.

During the latest hearing, SG Mehta questioned the credentials of the RTI applicant.

"Filing RTIs has become a profession. Now, 'RTI activist' is considered a designation, much like doctors and chartered accountants have visiting cards. The system is often misused and abused," he remarked.

He reiterated DU’s stance that it has a fiduciary duty to safeguard students' records and pointed out that three of the four RTI applications were rejected due to non-payment of fees.

"So the application wasn’t even processed because the fees weren’t paid," the Court noted.

Senior Advocate Hegde, however, countered that the defect was "curable" and should not have led to outright dismissal of the request.

"You could have simply refiled with ₹10," the SG remarked, emphasizing that public officers handle thousands of such applications.

Challenging DU’s fiduciary claim, Hegde argued that degree-related details are not confidential.

"If someone requires a scribe due to a disability, that information is fiduciary. But marks or degree information is not. If you take a driving test, the pass or fail result is public information," he said.

He further contended that public access to degree records should not depend on whether the subject is an ordinary citizen or a public figure.

The Court is set to continue hearing the matter on February 19.