The High Court reserves its verdict on the plea of ​​Delhi University against the disclosure of information

The High Court of Delhi on Thursday reserved a verdict on a plea submitted by Delhi (Du) that challenges an order of the Central Intelligence Commission (CIC) to direct the disclosure of information on Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Justice Sachin Datta reserved the decision.

Du submitted the plea in 2017 against the CIC Order, which allowed the inspection of the records of the students who passed the BA program in 1978, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is also stated that he has eliminated the exam. The order was left at the first time of the hearing on January 24, 2017.

The general applicant of India Tushar Mehta appeared for the varsity and claimed that the order involved adopted by CIC is possible to be canceled. He said he has no objection in showing the registration to the court. He said there was a diploma from 1978, a license in art.

SG added that Varsity has no reservation in showing the degree of court, but cannot put the registration for examination by foreigners.

Previously, Mehta claimed that the simple curiosity is not sufficient to address the forums the right to information (RTI).

“Here is a case in which a stranger enters the University RTI office and says, out of 10 Lakh students, give me a degree of X. Is the question if someone can enter and ask for diplomas of others?” Mehta said.

In addition, SG also said that the mere curiosity that an individual wants a person’s personal details is not an argument for disclosing this information in accordance with the RTI law.

On the other hand, senior Sanjay Hegde lawyer appeared for the applicant RTI Neij and transmitted that the information requested in this regard will be normally published by any university and ordinary to be published on the opinion councils, the Varsity site and even the newspapers.

It was also opposed to the transmission made by SG Mehta that the students’ information was held by a university with a “fiduciary capacity” and could not be disclosed “to a stranger”, because the same is exempted from the disclosure in law.

About controversy

The RTI activist, Neeraj Kumar, filed a RTI request that sought the result of all the students who appeared in BA in 1978, together with their number, names, brands and results or failed.

The central public information officer (CPIO) of Du has denied information on the ground, which qualifies as “third -party information”. The RTI activist then filed an appeal in front of CIC.

CIC, in the order adopted in 2016, said: “After examining the case, the synonym laws and previous decisions, the Commission states that the issues related to a student’s education (current/former) fall into the public domain and, therefore, orders the relevant public authority to disclose information accordingly.”

CIC noted that each university is a public body and that all the information related to the degree is available in the private register of Varsity, which is a public document.

In front of the High Court, Delhi University, at the first time of the 2017 hearing, claimed that it has no difficulties in providing the information sought about on the total number of students who have appeared, passed or failed at the mentioned exam.

However, at the prayer looking for details about the results of all the students together with the rolling numbers, names and brands of the father, Varsity claimed that this information was exempted from the disclosure.

It was claimed that the same contained personal information by all the students who perusat in 1978 and that the information was held in a fiduciary capacity.

Title: University of Delhi v. Neeraj Kumar