Delhi University (DU) informed the Delhi High Court on Thursday that it has no objection to presenting Prime Minister Narendra Modi's degree but does not wish to subject it to scrutiny by unrelated individuals.

Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta made this submission before Justice Sachin Datta during the hearing of DU's plea challenging a 2017 order by the Central Information Commission (CIC), which directed the university to disclose details of Modi's degree in response to a Right to Information (RTI) request.

"The degree of one student is demanded, who is the PM of the county. We have nothing to hide. We have year-wise register where everything is mentioned. DU has no objection in showing the original degree for BA in 1978 to Court...DU has no reservation in showing but I will not expose university records to the scrutiny of strangers who are here either for publicity or for some oblique political motive," Mehta submitted.

The Court reserved its verdict in the case today, having already heard the other parties in previous hearings.  

The matter originated in 2016 when then Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to “come clean about his educational degrees” and publicly disclose them. Modi had declared in his election affidavit that he earned a B.A. in Political Science from Delhi University in 1978.  

Following this, Aam Aadmi Party supporter Neeraj Sharma filed an RTI request seeking details of Modi’s degree from DU. However, the university refused to disclose the information, asserting that it was “private” and “not a matter of public interest.”

In December 2016, Sharma challenged Delhi University's response before the Central Information Commission (CIC). Information Commissioner Prof. M. Acharyulu subsequently directed DU to publicly disclose the register containing the list of students who graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1978.  

On January 23, 2017, DU approached the High Court to contest the CIC order. The Court, after considering Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s arguments, issued a notice to Sharma and put the order on hold. Mehta had contended that the ruling could have wide-ranging adverse implications, as universities across the country hold degree records of millions of students in a fiduciary capacity.

In December 2016, Sharma challenged Delhi University's response before the Central Information Commission (CIC). Information Commissioner Prof. M. Acharyulu directed DU to publicly disclose the register listing students who completed the Bachelor of Arts program in 1978.  

On January 23, 2017, DU approached the High Court to contest the CIC order. The Court, taking note of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s arguments, issued a notice to Sharma and stayed the order. Mehta had argued that the ruling could have wide-reaching consequences, as universities across the country hold degree records of millions of students in a fiduciary capacity.

During Thursday’s hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing Delhi University, argued that the right to know is not an absolute or unrestricted right.

"In Puttaswamy case, there was one conclusion, unanimously passed, that right to privacy is protected under Article 21. Right to privacy supersedes right to know," he added.

"The authority will have to decide that what is your interest. They say that in public interest it needs to be given, Somebody has passed out in 1978. It is not relatable to his public duty, you are wanting to use it for political purpose," SG stated.

"We have it but we will not give it as we are not statutorily bound to. We have nothing to hide, we can show it your Lordship. In principal we will have to oppose, otherwise would be flooded with lakhs and lakhs of applications. There a quite a few free people in this world who would seek one information or the other," he further submitted.

Mehta further contended that the RTI Act should not be used as a tool to intimidate officials.

"Public authorities will not be able to exercise their purpose if such applications are entertained. People would be searching old documents, would be bogged down. RTI Act cannot be used as a tool to intimidate officers doing their duty."

SG Mehta criticized the RTI applicants, stating that they were making a mockery of the RTI Act. He also defended the ₹10 application fee, emphasizing its legitimacy.