PM degree row: Delhi HC asks DU to file objections to pleas to condone delay in filing appeals
New Delhi (PTI): The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked the Delhi University to file its objections to pleas seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals challenging an order relating to disclosure of details of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's bachelor's degree.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela granted three weeks to the varsity to file the reply on the applications seeking to condone the delay in filing appeals.
The bench was informed that there was a delay in filing the appeals challenging the single judge's August order.
"Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta appears for the respondent (Delhi University). Objections to the applications seeking condonation of delay may be filed within three weeks. Response to the said objection, if any, be filed by the appellants in two weeks thereafter," the bench said.
The court listed the matter for further hearing on January 16, 2026.
Four appeals have been filed challenging a single judge's order which had set aside a Central Information Commission (CIC) decision directing disclosure of Prime Minister Modi's degree.
The division bench was hearing the appeals filed by Right to Information activist Neeraj, Aam Aadmi Party leader Sanjay Singh and advocate Mohd Irshad.
During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioners contended that there are fundamental errors in the order passed by the single judge.
Solicitor General Mehta requested the court not to issue notice in the appeals at this stage as he was already appearing for the varsity and that he would file a reply to it.
Noting that there was a delay in filing the appeals, the court asked Mehta to file objections to the application seeking condonation of delay.
To this, the law officer said, “I was not aware there was a delay. I will go through the pleas. I have no hesitation in arguing the main matter also”.
On August 25, the single judge had set aside the CIC order, saying only because PM Modi was holding a public office, it did not render all his "personal information" to public disclosure.
It had ruled out any "implicit public interest" in the information sought, and said the RTI Act was enacted to promote transparency in government functioning and "not to provide fodder for sensationalism".
Following an RTI application by one Neeraj, the CIC on December 21, 2016, allowed inspection of records of all students who cleared the BA exam in 1978 -- the year Prime Minister Modi also passed it.
The single judge had passed the combined order in six petitions, including the one filed by the Delhi University, challenging the CIC order by which the varsity was directed to disclose the details related to Prime Minister Modi's bachelor degree.
The Delhi University's counsel had sought the CIC order to be set aside but said the varsity had no objection in showing its records to the court.
The single judge had opined the educational qualifications were not in the nature of any statutory requirement for holding any public office, or discharging official responsibilities.
The situation might have been different, had educational qualifications been a pre-requisite for eligibility to a specific public office, the judge had said, calling the CIC's approach "thoroughly misconceived".
The high court had also set aside the CIC order which directed the CBSE to provide copies of Class 10 and 12 records of former Union minister Smriti Irani.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
HC quashes order staying proceedings against Anil Ambani to classify his bank accounts as fraud
Mumbai (PTI): In a setback to industrialist Anil Ambani, the Bombay High Court on Monday quashed a single bench interim order that stayed proceedings initiated against him and Reliance Communications Ltd to classify their bank accounts as fraud.
A division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad allowed the appeals filed by three public sector banks and auditor firm BDO India LLP against the December 2025 interim order passed by a single bench of the HC.
The division bench, while quashing the single bench order, termed it "illegal and perverse".
ALSO READ: Shirtless protest at AI Summit: Delhi Police nabs Youth Congress worker in Gwalior, total arrests 5
Ambani's counsels sought the HC to stay its order so that they could approach the Supreme Court, but the request was declined.
The banks last month challenged a December 2025 single-bench order granting interim relief to Ambani and his company. The order had cited violations of mandatory RBI rules and a classic case of banks "waking up from deep slumber" after years.
The single bench order stayed all present and future action by Indian Overseas Bank, IDBI Bank and Bank of Baroda, noting that the action was based on a legally flawed forensic audit and violated the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) mandatory guidelines.
The three banks in their appeal said the forensic audit, which led to accounts being classified as "fraud", was legally valid and based on serious findings of fund siphoning and misutilisation.
This was recorded in the report submitted by the audit firm BDO LLP, they contended.
The banks, in their plea, also said Ambani had raised a technical challenge to the forensic audit before the single bench.
They sought the division bench to quash the single bench's interim order, claiming it was "perverse".
Ambani had challenged before the single bench show-cause notices issued by the Indian Overseas Bank, IDBI and Bank of Baroda, seeking to declare his and Reliance Communications' accounts as fraud accounts.
As an interim relief, he sought a stay of the notices and an injunction against any coercive action on the ground that BDO LLP was not qualified to conduct the forensic audit as its signatory was not a chartered accountant.
BDO LLP was an accounting consultant firm and not an audit firm, Ambani claimed.
The single bench had agreed with Ambani and stayed the action by the banks.
