The Delhi High Court on Friday set aside the suspension order of Ramanujan College principal Rasal Singh, terming the action taken by Delhi University authorities as 'stigmatic'. Singh was suspended following allegations of sexual harassment made by three women teachers.
Court Ruling
Justice Purushaindra K Kaurav granted relief to Singh, holding that both the college and Delhi University authorities had adopted a procedure contrary to the law. They suspended him based on a fact-finding report, even before the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) examined the complaints under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act.
The court, however, left it open for Delhi University to pass a fresh suspension order if deemed necessary, observing that an employer can place an employee under suspension while an inquiry under the POSH Act is pending.
Reasons for Quashing Suspension
The High Court cited two primary reasons for quashing Singh's suspension. First, it found fault with the constitution of an ad hoc fact-finding committee by the DU registrar (colleges), instead of referring the allegations directly to the ICC, as mandated by law. The court held that such a committee was 'unbeknownst to the law and in violation of the POSH Act'.
'Once the legislature has expressly designated the ICC or local committee as the authority to inquire into such complaints,' the court said, 'the creation of any parallel or pre-ICC body falls outside the statutory framework.'
Secondly, the court took exception to the language of the suspension order, holding that it was inherently prejudicial. A plain reading of the order, which referred to 'serious misconduct and harassment', would create a negative and damaging impression of the individual even before any inquiry was concluded.
'No person deserves to be met with such treatment while an inquiry is pending,' the High Court observed, adding that if the suspension order itself becomes punitive, it undermines the constitutional presumption of innocence.
Arguments and Background
Senior advocate Geeta Luthra and advocate Prashansika Thakur, appearing for Singh, argued that despite an unblemished service record and distinguished academic career, he was being victimised and framed. The High Court had stayed the suspension in September last year.
