Delhi HC Fixes September 29 Hearing on Appeals Seeking PM Modi’s Degree Details

August 20, 2026

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday fixed September 29 for hearing appeals seeking disclosure of records related to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s bachelor’s degree.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia was hearing appeals challenging a single-judge judgment that had set aside a Central Information Commission (CIC) direction concerning disclosure of records related to Modi’s educational qualification.

Delhi HC schedules next hearing

At the outset of Thursday’s hearing, a passover was sought on behalf of the appellants.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Delhi University, requested an earlier date for the matter. The Bench, however, said it would hear the appeals on September 29 after checking its calendar.

The appeals have been filed by RTI activist Neeraj, Aam Aadmi Party leader Sanjay Singh and advocate Mohd Irshad.

Case relates to 2025 single-judge ruling

The matter stems from a single-judge judgment passed on August 25, 2025, which set aside the CIC’s order directing disclosure of records concerning Modi’s bachelor’s degree.

The single judge had observed that holding public office does not automatically make all personal information about an individual subject to public disclosure.

The court had also rejected the argument of any “implicit public interest” in the information sought and observed that the Right to Information Act was enacted to promote transparency in government functioning rather than provide “fodder for sensationalism”.

How the case began

The proceedings originated from an RTI application filed by Neeraj.

Following the application, the CIC on December 21, 2016, had permitted inspection of records of students who cleared the BA examination in 1978, the year Modi is stated to have passed the examination.

Delhi University subsequently challenged the CIC’s direction.

The single judge had passed a common judgment in six petitions, including the university’s challenge.

What did the single judge rule?

The single judge had held that educational qualifications were not a statutory requirement for holding public office or performing official responsibilities.

The court observed that the situation could have been different if a specific educational qualification had been prescribed as a legal prerequisite for eligibility to a particular public office.

The single judge had also described the CIC’s approach as “thoroughly misconceived” while setting aside its direction.

The Division Bench will now hear the appeals on September 29.