Sexual harassment at work: Panels can be altered sans violation of law, says HC

Punjab and Haryana high court bench dismisses plea against a Patiala college for appointing a male professor as committee chairman

The constitution of committees constituted at workplaces to deal with complaints of sexual harassment can be changed if the situation warrants, but not in violation of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, a Punjab and Haryana high court bench has held.

Sexual harassment at work: Panels can be altered sans violation of law, says HC

HC has dismissed a plea against constitution of a committee by Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala, which was challenged on the ground that it has to be presided over by a professor,as per the University Grants Commission (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2015. But, in the law varsity’s committee, an associate professor has been appointed as committee head.

HC found that an associate professor has been appointed as chairman, since there is no woman faculty member in the rank of professor. Therefore, the constitution of the committee cannot be declared bad. It is an undisputed fact that it is a small university and there is no women faculty member in the rank of professor, it added.

It may be noted that the 2013 law is a Parliamentary Act and holds supremacy after the Constitution of India, the bench observed, adding that the UGC’s regulations are framed in exercise of the legislative powers conferred upon the executive body and are hence, referred as delegated/subordinate legislation.

“Therefore, these regulations cannot supersede the parent/Parliamentary Act which is made by the legislature itself,” the bench said, rejecting the argument that 2013 law is a general legislation, whereas the UGC’s regulations are specific legislation and therefore, have to prevail over the 2013 law.

“This court expresses its inability to accept the argument, particularly when the Parliamentary Act is applicable across the board and is a special Act enacted to deal with complaints of sexual harassment of women at workplace. The UGC’s regulations are to be read in consonance with the Act.

In case of any repugnancy, it is the Parliamentary Act which has to prevail. Still further, once a field is occupied by a Parliamentary Act, the regulations, if any, framed by way of subordinate legislation, cannot supersede or overwrite the provision of the Act,” the bench said.

To an argument that two contractual employees have been appointed as members in the nine-member committee, the court observed that there is no prohibition in the Act or regulations to include contractual employees in the committee. Out of the two contractual employees, one is a medical officer and the other is an assistant librarian, it said.

The court also found that it is not mandatory that one member has to be from a non-governmental organisation or association. One member can either be from non-government organisations or associations committed to the cause of womenor a person familiar with issues relating to sexual harassment, it said.