Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by students Tushar and Janmejai Shukla against the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of Christ University, Bengaluru, and others. The ICC had issued a recommendation report on 11.04.2018 directing the petitioners' debarment from studies for one year on allegations of sexual harassment made by a fellow student, Amrita S. Nair. The petitioners challenged the report on grounds of violation of natural justice, contending that they were not given a fair opportunity to defend themselves, including the right to cross-examine witnesses. The court examined the procedure followed by the ICC under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. It noted that the ICC had not provided the petitioners with copies of the complaint or statements of witnesses, nor allowed them to cross-examine the complainant or other witnesses. The court held that the ICC's inquiry was vitiated by procedural irregularities and breach of natural justice. Consequently, the court quashed the ICC's recommendation report and directed the university to constitute a fresh ICC to conduct a de novo inquiry in accordance with law, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice. The court also directed that the petitioners be permitted to continue their studies pending the fresh inquiry.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India - Maintainability - Petition against ICC report of university - Held that writ petition is maintainable against actions of a deemed university which is a State under Article 12 (Para 1).
B) Sexual Harassment - Internal Complaints Committee - Section 11 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Inquiry Procedure - ICC must provide opportunity of hearing to both parties - Held that failure to give opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and submit defence violates natural justice (Paras 5-10).
C) Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Audi Alteram Partem - Applicability to disciplinary proceedings in educational institutions - Held that any quasi-judicial body must adhere to principles of natural justice before imposing punishment (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the recommendation report dated 11.04.2018 passed by the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of Christ University, directing punishment of debarment from studies for one year, is sustainable in law and whether the ICC followed principles of natural justice.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petitions, quashed the ICC recommendation report dated 11.04.2018, and directed the university to constitute a fresh Internal Complaints Committee to conduct a de novo inquiry in accordance with law, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice. The petitioners were permitted to continue their studies pending the fresh inquiry.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Right to be Heard
- Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention
- Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013
- Internal Complaints Committee
- Appellate Committee
- Writ Jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (01) 105
Writ Petition No.24456 of 2018 c/w Writ Petition No.23039 of 2018 (GM-RES)
Mr. Prashanth H S (for petitioner in WP 24456/2018), Mr. P P Hegde (for petitioner in WP 23039/2018), Mr. Jayna Kothari (senior advocate for R4), Mr. Siddharth B Muchandi (for R3), Mr. H S Chandramouli (for R3), Mr. H S Prashant (for R5 in WP 23039/2018)
Mr. Tushar and Mr. Janmejai Shukla
Internal Complaints Committee, Christ University; Internal Complaints Appellate Committee; Christ (Deemed to be University); Ms. Amrita S. Nair; Mr. Janmejai Shukla (in WP 24456/2018) / Mr. Tushar (in WP 23039/2018)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the recommendation report of the Internal Complaints Committee of Christ University directing debarment of the petitioners from studies for one year on allegations of sexual harassment.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the ICC recommendation report dated 11.04.2018 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto.
Filing Reason
The petitioners alleged that the ICC conducted the inquiry in violation of principles of natural justice, without providing them an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or submit their defence.
Previous Decisions
The ICC had submitted a recommendation report to the university on 11.04.2018, which was challenged by the petitioners. The Internal Complaints Appellate Committee (ICAC) had also upheld the report.
Issues
Whether the ICC's recommendation report was vitiated by violation of principles of natural justice?
Whether the petitioners were given a fair opportunity to defend themselves in the inquiry?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that they were not provided with copies of the complaint or statements of witnesses, nor allowed to cross-examine the complainant or other witnesses, violating natural justice.
Respondents contended that the ICC followed the procedure under the Sexual Harassment Act and that the petitioners were given sufficient opportunity.
Ratio Decidendi
The Internal Complaints Committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013 must adhere to principles of natural justice, including providing the accused with an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and submit a defence. Failure to do so renders the inquiry and recommendation void.
Judgment Excerpts
The ICC did not provide the petitioners with copies of the complaint or statements of witnesses, nor allowed them to cross-examine the complainant or other witnesses.
The inquiry was vitiated by procedural irregularities and breach of natural justice.
Procedural History
The Internal Complaints Committee of Christ University conducted an inquiry into allegations of sexual harassment against the petitioners and issued a recommendation report on 11.04.2018 directing debarment from studies for one year. The petitioners filed writ petitions before the High Court of Karnataka challenging the report. The court heard both petitions together and delivered judgment on 27.02.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013: Section 11
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
