BIDYUG CHAKRABORTY Vs. DELHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who was Head of Department of Political Science in delhi University, was appointed as Honorary Director of Gandhi Bhawan for a period of two years w. e. f. 01. 08. 2006. Dr. Anamika Sharma vide her complaint dated 04. 04. 2007, to the Vice Chancellor of Delhi University alleged sexual harassment by the petitioner. In terms of ordinance XV D of the University, Othe University had constituted committees including the apex Complaint Committee to deal with the complaints of sexual harassments. Respondent No. 3 Dr. Anamika Sharma made a complaint to the Vice Chancellor of the University as well as to the Apex Committee, complaining of sexual harassment by the petitioner. Similar complaint was also sent by Anamika Sharma, to the Apex Committee. The Apex committee, after perusal of the complaint, decided that prima facie a case of sexual harassment was made out and set up an Enquiry Committee to investigate the case. The petitioner submitted to the jurisdiction of the committee, which submitted its report, holding the petitioner guilty of the charges of sexual harassment, as listed in the charge sheet given to him by the committee. The committee recommended the following disciplinary actions against the petitioner:

(2.) VIDE two separate memorandums, both dated October 16, 2007, the executive council of the University, accepting the recommendations made by the committee, warned the petitioner and also debarred from holding any administrative post in the university for a period of three years from the date of the memorandum. The petitioner has, in this writ petition sought quashing of both these memorandum as well as the report of the committee. Since the university, vide another notification dated 15. 10. 2007, appointed one Professor Achin Vanaik as Head of Department of Political Science and dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences, the petitioner has also sought quashing of that notification. He is also seeking quashing of ordinance XV-D of Delhi University on the ground that it is violative of Article (s) 14,16 and 311 of the Constitution as it gives unfettered, unguided and arbitrary powers to the Enquiry committee and does not contain sufficient safeguards for the person who is accused of sexual harassment and thus violates the principles of natural justice.

(3.) ORDINANCE XV-D, to the extent it is relevant provides as under: scope of the Ordinance: