Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal merely wants to keep alive the controversy surrounding the academic degree of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Gujarat University on Friday told the Gujarat High Court [Arvind Kejriwal v. State of Gujarat]..Justice Biren Vaishnav was hearing a review application filed by Kejriwal against the March 31, 2023 judgment, by which the High Court quashed an order of the Chief Information Commission (CIC).Notably, the CIC had ordered the Gujarat University to disclose the details of PM Modi's degree on an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act filed by Kejriwal.In its detailed order, the High Court had also imposed costs of ₹25,000 on Kejriwal for making 'mockery' of the RTI Act.Kejriwal subsequently filed an application seeking review of the same..Opposing the review plea, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appeared for Gujarat University and argued,"This review is an attempt to keep the controversy alive for no reason. It might suit the review applicant (Kejriwal) to keep the pot boiling but not for us. If there is a personal information, I (university) cannot give it unless the authorities record a finding that revealing the said information involves public interest. This is just a childish prayer by Kejriwal that if someone wants his information then even he should get the information regarding the Prime Minister's academic degree."Justifying the High Court's findings and the costs imposed, Mehta said that Kejriwal was 'guilty' of abusing the process of salutary provisions of the RTI Act."The degree has no relation with the public office which the Prime Minister holds. However, the order of the CIC for disclosing the same was made a subject matter of a political storm for no reason and to bring down the public discourse at its lowest level."The Solicitor General further submitted that the University was not bound to disclose the PM's degree by law.He, therefore, requested the Court to impose costs on the Delhi CM for filing the review application..Senior Advocate Percy Kavina, appearing for Kejriwal, said that Mehta's submissions reflected an "attitude to quash every legal form of dissent".He told the Court that it erred in making certain observations, especially those stating that his client's conduct was reprehensive."We haven't in any manner invited the wrath of this Court for it to impose costs on us. We have in fact sought for expeditious disposal of the proceedings and never prolonged the litigation here," Kavina submitted.On the Court's finding that disclosing the PM's degree has nothing to do with the 'larger public interest', Kavina said, "This finding is based on no fact. Our conduct isn't of such a manner that would justify this Court's observations. A word that falls from a superior court makes a tremendous effect. The observations in my respectful submissions are unwarranted."In response to the finding of the Court that since the Gujarat University has submitted that the degree is made available on its official website, there was no reason for Kejriwal to seek the same through RTI, Kavina said,"The assertion (of the university) that a degree is available on the website of the varsity is incorrect. It is certainly not a degree, which is available on the internet.".Having heard the contentions, the Bench reserved its verdict in the matter.