Modi’s degree case: Gujarat HC dismisses Kejriwal’s review plea, says ‘does not reflect good taste in public life’

The court of Justice Biren Vaishnav said on Thursday that it would “tend to agree with the submission” of Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta — representing GU — that Kejriwal, having “lost in his legal remedy” when the HC allowed GU’s petition in March, “continues to harp upon his pursuit in following a cause by proceeding in this review application in a manner which does not reflect good taste in public life”.

“The court is conscious that seeking a review is and could be a remedy available in law but looking to the grounds and the arguments raised before this court in the review application, it cannot be said that the applicant (Kejriwal) has sought to invoke this remedy purely with a view to seeking legal recourse,” Justice Vaishnav observed. Dismissing the review petition, the court of Justice Vaishnav, however, imposed no costs.

In March, allowing the varsity’s plea, the court had imposed a penalty of Rs 25,000 on Kejriwal. In his review petition, Kejriwal had challenged the cost imposed on him by the court for persisting with the matter of the PM’s degrees. In review, the court, however, held that the cost was justified as Kejriwal “tried to deflect the entire proceedings to politicise the issue”.

Thursday’s verdict implies that Kejriwal will now have to pay the penalty of Rs 25,000.

Seeking a review of the March order, Kejriwal had submitted in his review petition that while Mehta, on behalf of GU, submitted that Modi’s degree is available on the university’s website, “upon a scan of the said website…(it) is found that the said ‘degree’ is not available, but a document referred to as OR (Office Register) is displayed”. He added that the display of “degree” on the university’s official website is taken as the preliminary and main ground for seeking a review of the court’s earlier order. The Delhi CM also alleged that with the degree not being available on the website, the judgment thus “suffers from the error apparent on the face of the record and permitting them would lead to failure of justice”.

However, opposing the review application, Mehta added that a remedy for Kejriwal would lie in appeal and not a review. He had further insisted to the court that cost be imposed even for filing review, terming it to be “only an attempt to keep the pot boiling for something which the law prohibits”.