Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Smt. Bindu Tripathi @ Bindu Singh vs Dr. Shakuntala Misra National ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 August, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Notice for opposite party Nos.1 to 3 has been accepted by Mr.Atul Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the respondent. For the order proposed, no need to issue notice to opposite party Nos.4 to 7. Notice to opposite party Nos.4 to 7 is dispensed with.
2. Since trivial legal issue is involved in the matter, we, after hearing the parties, are deciding the petition at the admission stage.
3. This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned composition of Internal Complaint Committee constituted on 24/05/2021 in Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University, Mohan Road, Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No.-1 to this writ petition.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Opposite Party no.1 to 2 to ensure composition of the Internal Complaint Committee of Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University, Mohan Road, Lucknow in accordance with law or alternatively ensure that the enquiry be conducted on the complaint of the petitioner as provided under the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 and the University Grant Commission (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employee and Student in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulation 2015, outside the University campus by an Internal Complaint Committee of some another University in Lucknow.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the Opposite Party no.1 to 2 to ensure free and fair enquiry on the complaint of the petitoner as contained in Annexure No.2 & 3 to this writ petition containing the complaint dated 07/07/2021 and the affidavit dated 09/08/2021.
(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
(v) Allow the petition with cost."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the University Grant Commission (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employee and Student in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2015 have been framed by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govt. of India, which has been notified on 02.05.2016 and they are binding on all the universities in the Country. Grievance redressal mechanism has been provided under Clause 4 of the said Regulations 2015, which provides constitution of Internal Complaint Committee (for short 'ICC') with an inbuilt mechanism for gender sensitization against sexual harassment.
Clause 4 of the said Regulations 2015 reads as under:-
"4. Grievance redressal mechanism.- (1) Every Executive Authority shall constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) with an inbuilt mechanism for gender sensitization against sexual harassment. The ICC shall have the following composition:-
"(a) A Presiding Officer who shall be a woman faculty member employed at a senior level (not below a Professor in case of a university, and not below an Associate Professor or Reader in case of a college) at the educational institution, nominated by the Executive Authority;
Provided that in case a senior level woman employee is not available, the Presiding Officer shall be nominated from other offices or administrative units of the workplace referred to in sub-section 2(o);
Provided further that in case the other offices or administrative units of the workplace do not have a senior level woman employee, the Presiding Officer shall be nominated from any other workplace of the same employer or other department or organization;?
(b) two faculty members and two non-teaching employees, preferably committed to the cause of women or who have had experience in social work or have legal knowledge, nominated by the Executive Authority;
(c) Three students, if the matter involves students , who shall be enrolled at the undergraduate, master?s, and research scholar levels respectively, elected through transparent democratic procedure.
(d) One member from amongst non-government organisations or associations committed to the cause of women or a person familiar with the issues relating to sexual harassment, nominated by the Executive Authority.
(2) At least one-half of the total members of the ICC shall be women.
(3) Persons in senior administrative positions in the HEI, such as Vice- Chancellor, Pro Vice-Chancellors, Rectors, Registrar, Deans, Heads of Departments, etc., shall not be members of ICCs in order to ensure autonomy of their functioning.
(4) The term of office of the members of the ICC shall be for a period of three years. HEIs may also employ a system whereby one ? third of the members of the ICC may change every year.
(5) The Member appointed amongst the non-governmental organizations or associations shall be paid such fees or allowances for holding the proceedings of the Internal Committee, by the Executive Authority as may be prescribed.
(6) Where the Presiding Officer or any member of the Internal Committee:
(a) contravenes the provisions of section 16 of the Act; or
(b) has been convicted for an offence or an inquiry into an offence under any law for the time being in force is pending against him; or
(c) he has been found guilty in any disciplinary proceedings or a disciplinary proceeding is pending against him; or
(d) has so abused his position as to render his continuance in office prejudicial to the public interest, such Presiding Officer or Member, as the case may be, shall be removed from the Committee and the vacancy so created or any casual vacancy shall be filled by fresh nomination in accordance with the provisions of this section.?
5. Under Sub-Clause 3 of Clause 4 of the said Regulation, 2015 persons in senior administrative positions in the Higher Educational Institution such as Vice-Chancellor, Pro Vice-Chancellors, Rectors, Registrar, Deans, Heads of Department, etc., shall not be member of ICC in order to ensure autonomy of their functioning. It is submitted that by the impugned order, the ICC has been constituted which is headed by one Dr.Shefali Yadav, Professor and Dean, Law Faculty. Submission is that Dr. Shefali Yadav being Head of Department and Dean, Law Faculty cannot be a member of the ICC and, as such, constitution of the ICC is against the said Regulations 2015 of the U.G.C.
6. Mr. Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Atul Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.1 to 3 tries to submit that constitution of the ICC has been done as per the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. It does not require that Head of Department or Dean, Department of the Higher Education Institution cannot become a member of the ICC.
7. We have considered the submissions and gone through the record.
8. We are of the considered view that the said Regulations, 2015 issued by the U.G.C. are binding on the opposite parties and they cannot say that they will not follow the said Regulations, 2015. There is a bar under Sub-clause 3 of Clause 4 of the Regulations, 2015 with respect to appointment of Vice-Chancellor, Pro Vice-Chancellors, Rectors, Registrar, Deans, Heads of Department, etc.
9. In the present case, Dr.Shefali Yadav is Head of Department and Dean, Faculty of Law, as such, in our considered opinion, she cannot be appointed as a member of the ICC to look into the complaint of the petitioner. The order impugned dated 24.05.2021 is bad in this view of the matter. It is hereby set aside.
10. At this stage, Mr. Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Advocate submits that opposite party Nos.1 to 3 may pass a fresh order in accordance with Regulations, 2015 of U.G.C.
11. We direct the Vice Chancellor of Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University to constitute an Internal Complaint Committee in accordance with Regulations, 2015 of the U.G.C. immediately within a period of one week from today.
12. With above observations, the writ petition is allowed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.) Order Date :- 26.8.2021/prateek
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt. Bindu Tripathi @ Bindu Singh vs Dr. Shakuntala Misra National ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 August, 2021
Judges
  • Ritu Raj Awasthi
  • Dinesh Kumar Singh