PM's Degree Is Personal Information Under RTI Act: Gujarat HC Dismisses Kejriwal's Appeal Full Case Analysis
EduLaw EditorialLandmark JudgementsThe Gujarat High Court, in a landmark ruling on the intersection of the Right to Information and the Right to Privacy, held that a Prime Minister's educational degree constitutes personal information exempt from disclosure under the RTI Act. The Division Bench dismissed Arvind Kejriwal's appeal and upheld Rs 25,000 costs, ruling that the CIC exceeded its jurisdiction. Read the full case analysis. Title: PM's Degree Is Protected Personal Information Under RTI — Gujarat High Court Draws the Line Between Transparency and Privacy Case Name: Arvind Kejriwal v. Gujarat University & Ors. Case Number: R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 796 of 2026 Court: Gujarat High Court (Division Bench) Judges: Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray Judgment Date: September 29, 2026 Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 263 ABSTRACT This case analysis examines the Division Bench judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Arvind Kejriwal v. Gujarat University & Ors., wherein the court comprehensively addressed the tension between the citizen's right to information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter "RTI Act") and an individual's constitutionally protected right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The central question was whether the educational degree of the Prime Minister of India could be compelled to be disclosed through the machinery of the RTI Act. The court answered in the negative, holding that educational records constitute "personal information" protected under Section 8(1)(j) and information held in a "fiduciary capacity" under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. The judgment further found that the Central Information Commission (CIC) had acted beyond its statutory jurisdiction by taking suo motu cognizance of a letter written by Kejriwal during unrelated proceedings and treating it as a formal RTI application. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Rs 25,000 costs imposed on the appellant, observing that the RTI Act cannot be weaponised for political vendetta. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Background of the Dispute Factual Matrix and Procedural History Key Legal Issues Before the Court The Court's Analysis on CIC's Jurisdiction Under the RTI Act Personal Information, Fiduciary Duty, and the Privacy Shield Under Section 8 The Public Interest Test — Balancing Transparency and Privacy RTI as a Political Tool — The Court's Strong Observations Conclusion, Implications, and Key Takeaways INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTE The Right to Information Act, 2005 was enacted as a powerful instrument of democratic accountability, giving every citizen the right to access information held by or under the control of public authorities. However, the Act was never intended to be an unbounded sword. It carefully carved out exemptions under Section 8 to protect national security, sovereignty, commercial confidence, fiduciary relationships, and crucially, personal privacy. The case of Arvind Kejriwal v. Gujarat University & Ors. brings into sharp focus the collision between two fundamental constitutional values — the right of citizens to demand transparency from those who govern them, and the right of every individual, including a public servant, to the sanctity of personal information that has no bearing on the discharge of public functions. The dispute originated in 2016 when Arvind Kejriwal, then Chief Minister of Delhi and convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), wrote a letter to the Central Information Commission during the pendency of separate proceedings concerning his own electoral photo identity card. In that letter, he demanded that Prime Minister Narendra Modi's educational degree be made public. The then Central Information Commissioner, M. Sridhar Acharyulu, treated the letter as an RTI application and suo motu directed Gujarat University and Delhi University to provide information regarding the degrees of the Prime Minister to Kejriwal. This extraordinary step by the CIC — converting a letter written during unrelated proceedings into a formal RTI application and issuing disclosure directions — became the nucleus of a legal battle that wound its way through a single-judge bench, a division bench, and spanned nearly a decade. The Gujarat High Court's September 2026 judgment represents the definitive judicial pronouncement on the scope of RTI exemptions concerning personal educational records and the jurisdictional limits of the CIC. FACTUAL MATRIX AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In April 2016, while the Central Information Commission was adjudicating a complaint filed by an RTI applicant concerning Arvind Kejriwal's electoral photo identity card, Kejriwal submitted a written response dated April 28, 2016. In this response, he stated that he had no objection to government records about him being made public and questioned why the CIC wished to "hide" information concerning the Prime Minister's educational qualifications. On the very next day, the then Information Commissioner M. Sr