Verifying an Employee's Degree? What RTI Can and Cannot Do

Check This First

• The university’s verification cell: many universities and boards operate an official transcript or verification service, usually paid. This is the channel designed for employer verification, so try it before an RTI.
• DigiLocker / NAD: where the university has uploaded records, the candidate can share a verifiable digital copy with consent.
• The candidate’s own RTI: the simplest RTI route - the degree-holder requests their own records. See degree certificate not issued and how to verify a degree certificate through RTI.

Who Can File - and to Whom

• RTI is a citizen’s right: a company cannot file as a company, but an individual (for example, an HR officer in personal capacity) can.
• The RTI goes to the PIO of the public university or board that issued the degree. An institution set up only under a private instrument such as a trust deed or a society registration, with no government finance and no government control, is generally outside RTI - though its affiliating university or regulator may hold relevant records, and a university created by a law made by Parliament or a State Legislature is covered under Section 2(h)(b) or 2(h)(c) even if privately managed.

What Can Be Asked - and the Limits

Information commissions and courts have taken differing views on how much of another person’s academic record can be disclosed. A request framed at record-level authenticity - whether a certificate bearing a given number and year matches the institution’s records - asks for less than a request for the person’s marks, address or file, and is the framing we use; we do not cite a decision here, and we do not promise how yours will be decided. Personal details of the degree-holder attract the Section 8(1)(j) exemption, and the PIO may run the Section 11 third-party procedure before deciding.

On when a privately managed institution is still answerable under RTI, see our DAV College Trust case note and the RTI case-law library - educational reading, not a promise of outcome.

Sample RTI Questions (record-based framing)

• Whether the institution’s records contain a degree/certificate bearing number ________, issued in the year ________ for the course ________, and whether it matches those records as issued.
• The prescribed official procedure and fee for third-party degree verification, and where such requests are to be sent.
• The number of verification requests pending with the verification cell and the ordinary processing time, as on record.
• Whether the institution treats the record sought as confidential third-party information, and if the Public Information Officer intends to disclose it, the date of the notice issued under Section 11.

What RTI Cannot Do Here

• It does not by itself compel disclosure of another person’s personal details - marks, address, or file contents - where clause (j) applies; since 13 November 2025 that clause exempts “information which relates to personal information” without the qualifiers it used to carry. Section 8(2) and the proviso to Section 11(1), above, are what you argue against it.
• It does not reach an institution that is neither established under a law nor substantially financed by government. An aided or substantially financed private institution can itself be a public authority under Section 2(h)(ii), so check before assuming a college is outside the Act.
• It is not a bulk-verification pipeline: each RTI is one citizen’s request. For volume verification, the university’s official cell is the designed route - RTI is the accountability lever when that cell goes silent.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Filing in a company’s name - RTI is a citizen’s right under Section 3, so file as an individual citizen.
• Asking for the candidate’s marks or personal file - frame at authenticity of the certificate as a record.
• Skipping the university’s own verification cell - PIOs often simply point you there.

Common Questions

Can an employer verify an employee's degree through RTI?

An individual citizen can ask a public university whether a certificate matches its records. That framing asks for less than the person’s marks or file, and any earlier decisions allowing it were given before 13 November 2025; personal details of the degree-holder fall under Section 8(1)(j), which was substituted on that date and now exempts “information which relates to personal information”, and the PIO may consult the third party under Section 11.

Did the law on asking about someone else’s records change?

Yes. On 13 November 2025 Section 8(1)(j) was substituted by section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. The clause no longer contains the public-activity test, the unwarranted-invasion test or the public-interest proviso that used to sit inside it. The two provisions we would plead here are Section 8(2), which is permissive, and, where the record relates to or was supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the proviso to Section 11(1), which allows disclosure where the public interest outweighs the harm to that third party, except for trade or commercial secrets protected by law.

What about degrees from private universities?

It depends on how the institution was created and financed. A university established by a law made by Parliament is a public authority under Section 2(h)(b), and one established by a law made by a State Legislature under Section 2(h)(c), even if it is privately managed. A body owned, controlled or substantially financed by government funds can be one under Section 2(h)(i) or 2(h)(ii). An institution set up only under a private instrument such as a trust deed or a society registration, with no government finance and no government control, is generally outside RTI - in which case check whether a public affiliating university, board or regulator holds the record.

Is there a faster official route than RTI?

Usually yes: the university's own verification cell (paid) or DigiLocker/NAD with the candidate's consent. RTI is the route to try when that official channel is unresponsive - asking on record about your pending verification request and its recorded status.

How FileMyRTI Helps

We draft record-based verification RTIs framed at the record rather than at the person - correctly addressed, correctly framed. For recurring verification needs, talk to us about a structured process; for one request, apply below and our team handles the drafting and filing.

If there is no reply in time

The PIO is ordinarily required to respond within 30 days under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act. Count 30 days unless you are told otherwise. Section 11(3) gives the Public Information Officer forty days from receipt of the request, notwithstanding Section 7, but only where the third party was given an opportunity to make a representation under Section 11(2). You will normally learn that from the officer, so count 40 only once you have been told the Section 11 procedure was invoked. If there is no proper response by the date that applies, file a First Appeal with the First Appellate Authority of the same public authority; if that also fails, a Second Appeal lies with the Information Commission. The first-appeal fee is set by each state and is not uniform - Maharashtra charges ₹20 under rule 5(1) of the Maharashtra RTI Rules 2026 notified on 7 July 2026 (Gazette Extraordinary Part IV-A No. 273, which supersede the rules of 12 June 2026), while the central Rules prescribe none for a Central public authority - so check your own state in our RTI fee calculator before you send it. FileMyRTI prepares the First Appeal (Rs.599 incl. GST) when a reply does not come.

Want the full details of this service — what we ask, what you get, and how filing works? See the dedicated service page: RTI For Marksheet Verification