Re: Instead of strengthening the Congress, emphasize weakening the RSS! (E3)

[Arvind Sontakke Science]

1. डिग्री दिखाव-नहीं तो कुर्सी खाली करो, कुर्सी खाली करो।
2. गरीबोसे कागज माँगते हो-खुद की डिग्री छुपाते हो-नहीं चलेंगा , नहीं चलेंगा .
3. भारत की १४० करोड़ जनता पूछती है-डिग्री कहाँ है , डिग्री कहाँ है ।
4. 1978-कंप्युटर से छापी गई डिग्री कहाँ से लाए मोदीजी-डिग्री दिखाव-नहीं तो कुर्सी खाली करो, कुर्सी खाली करो।
5.  मोदी जी की डिग्री बोगस है। बोगस है। यह बड़ा फ्रॉड है, बड़ा फ्रॉड है।
6. मोदीजी “एंटायर पॉलिटिकल साइंस “ की डिग्री पृथ्वी गृह पर किस देश में पढ़ायी  जाती है इस जवाब दो , जवाब दो ।।
7. चुनाव शपथपत्र में घोषित-डिग्री दिखावो डिग्री दिखावो ।
8. चुनाव शपथपत्र में घोषित डिग्री-नकली डिग्री-कानूनी करवायी क्यों नहीं ? क्यों नहीं ?
9. भाजपा-RSS-मोदी शाह-मोदी की डिग्री दिखावो डिग्री दिखावो ।।
10. चुनाव आयोग ने प्रधानमंत्री मोदी की उम्मीदवारी (कैंडिडेचर) या चुनाव अब तक भी कभी रद्द क्यों नहीं किया? डिग्री कागज़_दिखाना_होगा-डिग्री_चोर_गद्दी_छोड़
11. सच्चे इंसान-ना डिग्री छुपाते हैं ना पत्नी छुपाते हैं ।।
12. पारदर्शिता भजन है या कानूनी अधिकार है ।।
13. मोदी की डिग्री-चुनाव आयोग जवाब दो। मोदी जी इस्तीफा दो।।
14. लाख छुपाओ छुप ना सकेंगा राज है इतना गहरा -दिल की बात बता देता है मोदी का चेहरा ।
15. डिग्री छुपाओगे तो गद्दी खोओगे! गद्दी खोओगे।।
16. जनता का नारा है – मोदी की डिग्री दिखाना ज़रूरी है!
17. डिग्री का खेल नहीं चलेगा, नहीं चलेगा!
18. झूठी डिग्री–झूठा प्रधानमंत्री!
19. डिग्री बिना नेता–जनता के साथ धोखा!
20. सत्य बोलो, डिग्री खोलो!
21. डिग्री पे पर्दा–लोकतंत्र पे वार!
22. डिग्री चुपाओगे–जनता उठेगी! विद्रोह करेंगी । विद्रोह करेंगी ।।
23. डिग्री है नकली–सत्ता है जाली!
24. डिग्री बताओ, वरना गद्दी छोड़ो!
25. जनता पूछे–डिग्री कहाँ है मोदी जी?
26. डिग्री दिखाओ–लोकतंत्र बचाओ!
27. डिग्री चोरी–देश से गद्दारी!
28. डिग्री छुपाना–मतदाता को धोखा देना!
29. डिग्री चोर–लोकतंत्र का दुश्मन!
30. डिग्री राज़ खोलो–देश को सच बोलो!
31. बड़ा सवाल है कि अगर डिग्री सच में है तो छुपाने की इतनी मशक्कत क्यों? 
32.  जनता सब जानती हैं डिग्री नहीं -इसलिए सार्वजनिक दिखाते नहीं।

Fake Degree – Narendra Modi

1. Which degree is objectionable?
2. Does the “Right to Privacy” apply to the entire population of India?
3. Why should the degree of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi be under suspicion or scrutiny?
4. How was the “Right to Privacy” violated?
5. Is the Right to Privacy greater than the rights of 1.4 billion people of India?
6. If Narendra Modi reveals his degree, will there be an earthquake or terrible consequences?
7. Does an Indian citizen not have the right to know Narendra Modi’s degree?
8. If Narendra Modi’s degree is made public, will there be an earthquake or terrible consequences?
9. Why did the Delhi High Court, by its order dated 25-08-2025, prohibit the disclosure of Narendra Modi’s degree?
10. Has Parliament passed any law declaring that asking for anyone’s degree information is illegal?
11. If I apply for a job in any government department, can I also refuse to show my degree like Narendra Modi? Then why is a degree mandatory for common citizens to get a job in India?
12. Why does the voter who elected Narendra Modi as Prime Minister not have the right to see his degree?
13. The Central Information Commission ordered disclosure of Narendra Modi’s degree, then why did the High Court give a contrary decision?
14. If Narendra Modi’s degree is found to be fake and false, what will be the consequences?
15. Is this an issue of “Right to Privacy of 1.4 billion Indians versus Narendra Modi’s Right to Privacy regarding his degree”?
16. Is it not true that Narendra Modi himself has said that he is not very educated?
17. Do Indian citizens not have the right to verify the degree stated by Narendra Modi in his election affidavit – the 1978 Delhi University BA degree and the 1983 MA in “Entire Political Science”?
18. Can Narendra Modi contest elections on the basis of a fake degree? Is it permissible to give false information about one’s degree in the election affidavit?
19. Why is Narendra Modi ashamed to show his degree?
20. Are degrees not public documents?
21. When the Government of India asks everyone to show their degree, why should Prime Minister Narendra Modi not show his?
22. Every Indian citizen is ready and happy to show his/her degree, then why does Narendra Modi feel tension in showing his degree? Why does he hide it?
23. Why can’t the principle be – “My Degree, My Identity”?
24. Why did Amit Shah and Arun Jaitley have to show Narendra Modi’s degree in a press conference?
25. Is Narendra Modi the only person in the world who has a degree in “Entire Political Science”?
26. Is Narendra Modi the only person in the world who, despite not having a BA in “Entire Political Science,” obtained an MA in “Entire Political Science” from Ahmedabad University in 1983?
27. Computers came to India in 1985, then how was a BA degree supposedly obtained in 1978 written on a computer?
28. In 1978 and for many years after, degrees were handwritten. Then how was the 1978 BA degree typed on a computer?
29. How was the 1978 BA degree typed on a computer, and that too on a Sunday – how is that possible?
30. How is it that professors in Gujarat (Ahmedabad) themselves came to know only after 2014 that Narendra Modi had done an MA in “Entire Political Science”?
31. Is Narendra Modi the only person in the world with a degree in “Entire Political Science,” and why does he not disclose which professors taught him, which students studied with him, when he attended the university, and when he took admission?
32. The font used in Narendra Modi’s degree was patented by Microsoft in 1992. How was it used on a 1978 degree?
33. Why did Narendra Modi have to show a suspicious 1978 degree and a suspicious 1985 degree? What was the need?
34. Why did the court not investigate Narendra Modi’s suspicious 1978 and 1985 degrees?
35. Why is Narendra Modi hiding the suspicious 1978 and 1985 degrees as if they were black money?
36. According to election law, it is mandatory for candidates to declare their highest educational qualification in the election affidavit. Did Narendra Modi’s affidavit clearly mention his BA/MA qualifications, or should it have?
37. The Supreme Court has said that voters have a fundamental right to know the educational qualifications of candidates. In Narendra Modi’s case, how is this right of the people being protected?
38. Under Election Commission Form 26, it is mandatory to provide details of the highest education. If Narendra Modi did not provide full details about his education, what action can be taken under election law?
39. The Supreme Court has held that if a candidate gives false information in the election affidavit, the election can be set aside. Without investigating Narendra Modi’s qualifications and establishing the truth, how can democracy’s interests be safeguarded?
40. The Delhi High Court has ruled that Narendra Modi’s academic records are “personal information.” What limitation does this impose on the Right to Information of the public?
41. The purpose of the RTI Act is to ensure transparency in government functioning. Why is Modi’s educational information treated as private, merely as curiosity or sensationalism? Under what conditions of public interest is this justified?
42. According to the Delhi High Court, “Even a public person has the right to personal information.” Why then is the academic qualification of Narendra Modi, as a Prime Minister, kept confidential from voters?
43. The Delhi High Court recognized a “trust relationship” between a student and the university, making educational records confidential under RTI. In Narendra Modi’s case, what overriding “public interest” can be demonstrated to make his degree public?
44. The Central Information Commission had ordered in 2016 that Narendra Modi’s degree be disclosed, but the Delhi High Court overturned it. What were the legal reasons behind this judicial decision?
45. In a democracy, elected representatives are expected to be transparent. Why has Prime Minister Narendra Modi hidden his educational qualification? Why has the principle “My Degree, My Identity” not been applied?
46. Transparency in election affidavits is a right equally available to all citizens. As the Prime Minister of India, what is the justification for secrecy about Narendra Modi’s qualifications? By avoiding disclosure, which ethical principles are being violated?
47. No one has any special privilege under any specific law. Then what legal shield protects Narendra Modi from accountability for misinformation in his election affidavit?
48. On what decisions and judgments is the claim based that voters do not have the right to see a candidate’s academic qualifications? How has this controversy arisen in light of democratic norms and the principles of the RTI Act?
49. Given the Supreme Court's clear pronouncement in Mairembam Prithviraj v. Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh  that "every voter has a fundamental right to know the educational qualification of a candidate" and that a false declaration is a "substantial defect," how does the Delhi High Court's reasoning  that such information is 'personal information' and not subject to public disclosure reconcile with this established principle, especially for a public official whose declarations directly concern electoral integrity?
50.  While the Supreme Court in Central Public Information Officer v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal  applied a proportionality test to balance privacy against the public interest in transparency, how can this test be effectively and uniformly applied by public authorities like universities when faced with RTI requests for candidates' degrees, particularly in light of the Delhi High Court's more restrictive interpretation , which ties public interest to the statutory eligibility for office rather than the broader principle of informed democratic choice?
51. The Supreme Court in Mairembam Prithviraj v. Pukhrem Sharatchandra (2016) held that “every voter has a fundamental right to know about the educational qualification of a candidate” . Why should this principle not apply equally to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s degree disclosures?
52. In the same case, the Supreme Court quashed an election because the candidate falsely claimed an MBA degree. If the law invalidates an MLA’s election for a fake degree, why should it not equally apply to a Prime Minister if his declared degrees are false?
53. The Supreme Court has said that “a voter’s right to information is meaningless unless citizens are well informed about the antecedents of a candidate” . How can citizens be well informed if Modi’s degrees remain hidden behind the veil of ‘privacy’?
54. The Delhi High Court in University of Delhi v. Neeraj (25 Aug 2025) reaffirmed that education “can never be treated as personal information” and must be disclosed truthfully in election affidavits  . Why then has Narendra Modi’s education remained opaque despite repeated public demands?
55. If even the Delhi High Court recognized that candidates have a legal duty under Form 26 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to disclose their highest education correctly , then why is Modi allowed to withhold or obscure his BA/MA credentials?
56. Section 125A of the Representation of the People Act criminalizes false statements in election affidavits. If investigations reveal inconsistencies in Modi’s declared BA (1978, DU) and MA (1983, Gujarat University) degrees, should this not invite criminal liability under the same provision?
57. The Central Information Commission in 2016 categorically ruled that a candidate’s degree “cannot be considered personal information” . Why did the Delhi High Court later overturn the CIC’s order instead of strengthening voter rights in Modi’s case?
58. If the Delhi High Court (2025) has declared marksheets and answer sheets “personal” but accepted that the fact of holding a degree must be public, then why has Modi not proactively placed his BA/MA degree certificates in the public domain to settle all doubts?
59. Does Modi’s refusal to disclose his full academic record not directly conflict with the Supreme Court’s principle in Mairembam Prithviraj that voters have the right to correct educational information to make an informed choice?
60. When every government job applicant in India must produce their educational degrees for verification, why should the highest public office in India – the Prime Minister – be exempt from this requirement?
61. If the Delhi High Court set aside disclosure of detailed records under Section 8(1)(j) RTI Act, it was only on the basis that no “larger public interest” had been proven . Is not the integrity of the Prime Minister’s election affidavit itself a matter of overriding public interest?
62. Should Parliament and Election Commission not clarify, in light of these judgments, that hiding or misrepresenting educational qualifications in affidavits is a direct attack on voter sovereignty and democracy?
63.  In light of Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002) 5 SCC 294, which established that voters have a fundamental right to know candidates’ educational qualifications, how does the Delhi High Court’s August 25, 2025 ruling reconcile this constitutional principle with privacy rights?
64. The Supreme Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India held that educational qualifications should be available to voters as part of their right - what legal reasoning allows the Delhi High Court to override this precedent by classifying such information as “personal”?
65. Given that Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024) reaffirmed voters’ right to information about candidates, does the Delhi High Court’s classification of educational records as exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act create a conflict between transparency in elections and privacy rights?
66. The Supreme Court observed in February 2023 that “in India, no one votes on the basis of education qualification and therefore providing false information regarding education qualification of an election candidate can not be termed as a ‘corrupt practice’”  Live Law  - does this judicial observation diminish the importance of educational transparency in election affidavits?
67. Under the principle established in Resurgence India v. Election Commission of India, incomplete affidavits undermine voters’ fundamental rights - how does non-disclosure of educational details due to privacy exemptions affect this principle?
68. The Delhi High Court’s 175-page judgment (August 2025) creates a “trust relationship” exception between students and universities - is this a new legal precedent that could be applied to other public figures’ educational records?
69. Given that the Central Information Commission had ordered disclosure in 2017, and the Delhi High Court overturned it in 2025, what has changed in the legal interpretation of the balance between public interest and privacy rights over these eight years?
70. Whether educational qualifications of public officials lose their character as personal information?
71. How to balance voters' right to verify affidavit information against privacy rights?
72. What constitutes sufficient "public interest" to justify disclosure of personal information
73. Whether universities hold academic records in fiduciary capacity?

Arvind Sontakke 

Retired IRS

MUMBAI 

Email 22son...@gmail.com

On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 at 1:30 PM, Shrawan Deore <obcp...@gmail.com> wrote:

‘‘कॉंग्रेस को मजबूत करने के बजाय

RSS को कमजोर करने की ज्यादा जरुरत है।’’

यही है आज के समय की मांग!

RSS Vs PM Modi caste conflict: Diverted to Rahul (Part-2)

"RSS can't fight on cast issues"

प्रोफेसर श्रावण देवरे की मुलाखत.

1) https://youtu.be/AgN1nUPci9M?si=TBfB3Hu5D5TBtNFM

अगर यह लिंक ठीक से नही चली तो आगे दी हुयी लिंक क्लिक किजिए

2) https://youtu.be/rrh9HqlvAGg

 

1) संघ विरुद्ध मोदी संघर्ष ब्राह्मणी-अब्राह्मणी संघर्ष है।

2) मोदीजी ने कास्ट सेन्सस का हत्यार उठातेही RSS ने इस संघर्ष को राहूल के तरफ मोड दिया और "मत चोरी" व "EVM" जैसे छोटे मुद्दे के तले कास्ट के मुद्दे को दबा दिया।

3) इस जानलेवा जाती-संघर्ष मे मोदी जी को अगर जितना है तो उनको एक और बडा खतरनाक जाती के हत्यार को हाथ मे उठाना होगा!

4) अविश्वास प्रस्ताव आने से पहले अगर मोदीजी संसद मे दो क्रांतिकारी अध्यादेश लाते हैं तो कोईभी ओबीसी-दलित-आदिवासी का और मॉयनॉरीटीज का MP, चाहे वो किसी भी पार्टी से हो, मोदी के खिलाफ व्होटींग नही कर सकता।

5) इस क्रांतीकारी अध्यादेश का सबसे ज्यादा व सबसे पहले फायदा होगा नीतीश कुमार को और उसके बिहार को! इस वजहसे नितीश कुमार मोदी के खिलाफ जा ही नहीं सकते।

6) अ) पहिला क्रांतीकारी अध्यादेश है "आरक्षण पर लगाया गया असंवैधानिक 50 परसेंट का प्रतिबंध हटानेवावाल कानून बनाना"

ब) इस कानून के बाद तुरंत दुसरा अध्यादेश लाना होगा- "ओबीसी-दलित-आदिवासी सभी का आरक्षण संख्या के अनुपात मे बढानेवाल कानून।" इसकी वजहसे टोटल आरक्षण 85 पर्सेंट तक जा सकता है।

क) कुछ लोग कह सकते है की, यह सब करने का वादा तो राहूल जी ने भी किया है। लेकिन नेहरु-गांधी फॅमिली का इतिहास देखते हुये यह तय है की राहूल कितनी भी कोशिस कर ले, वो ना जाती-जनगणना कर सकते है, ना 50 पर्सेंट का बॅन हटा सकते हैं ।

ड) यह काम करने की जरुरत और हिम्मत सबसे ज्यादा मोदी जी के पास है। क्योंकी RSS से सबसे ज्यादा खतरा मोदी को है, राहूल को नही। इन दोनो अध्यादेश से RSS की कमर टुटनेवाली है, और यही चाहते हैं मोदी जी!

7) इसी वजहसे मोदी RSS के प्रभाव को खत्म करने के लिए बडी हिम्मत के साथ दोनो अध्यादेश लाएंगे और अपना प्रधानमंत्री पद मजबूत करेंगे।

8) सत्ताधारी ब्राह्मणवाद को कमजोर करने के बाद ही वर्ण-जातीअंतका रास्ता खुलता है, यह इतिहास बताता है।

9) RSS को कमजोर करने का काम ना राहूल गांधी कर सकते हैं, ना उसकी कॉंग्रेस! यह काम तो सिर्फ मोदीही कर सकते हैं खुदको बचाने के लिए!!

 

 ऐसे कई मुद्दोंपर चर्चा करने के लिए देखे, सुने और विचार करे उपर दिये हुये लिंकपर क्लिक करके।

 

Editor: Vivek Rana, Bahujan 85 Channel

Interview:  Prof Shrawan Deore

Contact:

81 77 86 12 56 / 75 88 07 28 32

Email: s.deo...@gmail.com