Tanya Gupta
Published on: March 21, 2022 at 18:30 IST
In the recent Sexual Harassment Case of Mangalore University Vs. Dr. Arabi U And Another, the Karnataka High Court has stayed its 2021 Order in which it was held that concerning Sexual Harassment at the Workplace, Service Rules must be followed by an Employer to Impose major Penalties such as Dismissal.
July 2021 Order was passed by Justice M Nagaprasanna which is recently Stayed by a Divisional Bench of Justices S Vishwajit Shetty and Alok Aradhe.
In Medha Kotwal Lele Vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that one more Disciplinary Inquiry is not required to be held as per Law, the Appellant argued.
High Court, in view of this Submission, stayed the Order in the present Case,
In the 2021 Case, the Supreme Court held that the Employer has to follow Service Rules, in the cases of Sexual Harassment, to impose Major Penalties.
The Court noted that the Internal Complaints Committee’s Report formed under the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (POSH Act) cannot be the Sole Basis for Dismissal but it can serve as a Fact-Finding Report.
“…where the Service Rules exist, the Report of the Committee becomes a Fact-Finding Report or a Preliminary Report, with regard to the Allegation of Sexual Harassment and the Employer becomes Duty Bound to proceed under the Service Rules before imposing any Major Penalty,” Justice M Nagaprasanna opined.
In the instant Case, Arabi U, a 60 Years old Professor at Mangalore University, Accused of Sexual Harassment filed the Petition.
The Complaint was Lodged by a Student with the State and National Commission of Women for an Incident that happened in 2018 when he was functioning as a Chairman of the Department of Economics.
The inquiry held by the Internal Complaints Committee found him Guilty of the Sexual Harassment Allegations.
A Show Cause Notice is then issued by the University to the Professor, as to why his services should not be Dismissed.
In the instant Case, the Appellant is represented by Senior Counsel Aruna Shyam and Advocate Revathy Adinath Narade represented the Respondent.