JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Ms. Priya Hingorani with learned Advocate Mr. Himanshu Yadav and learned Advocate Mr. Arpit Kapadia on behalf of the petitioner, and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Dhaval Dave with learned Advocate Mr. Udit Vyas on behalf of the respondents no. 1 and 2.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge an order dated 25.08.2023 passed by the respondent no. 2 herein whereby the services of the petitioner has been terminated.

3. Facts in brief as much as are necessary for the purpose of deciding petition are enumerated hereinbelow:

3.1 The petitioner was appointed vide order dated 19.04.2019 as Associate Professor (Nanotechnology) in the Institute of Research and Development under the erstwhile Gujarat Forensic Science Laboratory.

3.2 It appears that on 28.09.2020 the Parliament enacted the National Forensic Science University Act whereby the Gujarat Forensic Science University (GFSU) was established as a University by the name of National Forensic Science University (hereinafter referred to as ‘NFSU). Section 56 of the National Forensic Science University Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NFSU Act) repealed Gujarat Forensic Science University Act, 2008 and whereas vide Section 5(b) of the NFSU Act, it was provided inter alia that all appointments made under the provisions of the GFSU Act, 2008, would be deemed to have been made by the NFSU Act under the corresponding provisions if the NFSU Act.

3.3 It appears that upon complaint received from the respondent no. 4 herein, the Internal Complaint Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ICC’) of the NFSU, had conducted an inquiry and had recommended that the petitioner be penalized with highest penalty by the University. It appears that as per regulation 8(5) of the University Grant Commissions (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2015 [hereinafter referred to as UGC (PoSH) Regulations, 2015] the petitioner had submitted an appeal to the Executive Authority, respondent no. 2 herein i.e. Vice Chancellor of NFSU, Gandhinagar. The respondent no. 2 vide the order impugned dated 25.08.2023 had imposed punishment of termination from service upon the present petitioner resulting in the petitioner challenging the same by way the present petition.

4. While learned Senior Advocate Ms. Hingorani for the petitioner has raised various submissions against the order impugned, to this Court it appears that interference is warranted on the count of the impugned order being contrary to the procedure laid down in the UGC (PoSH) Regulations 2015 therefore, submissions insofar as relatable to the said aspect are recorded.

4.1 Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner would submit that Regulation 8 of the UGC (PoSH) Regulation, 2015 states regarding process of conducting inquiry. It is submitted that upon the inquiry being complete, the inquiry report with the recommendation if any, has to be submitted to the Executive Authority of the Institution in question and whereas findings or recommendations shall also be served both upon the complainant as well as the person accused. The Executive Authority of the Institution as per Regulation 8(4) is required to act upon the recommendations within a period of 30 days unless during the said period, appeal is filed by either party.

4.2 Learned Senior Advocate would further refer to Regulation 10 of the above regulations and submit that acting upon recommendations would entail the person found guilty of sexual harassment being punished as per the service Rules of the Institution if the offender is an employee.

4.3. It is submitted by learned Senior Advocate that in case of respondent University, the conditions of service of employees including manner of termination of service and disciplinary action are required to be provided by statues, as per Section 40(F) of the NFSU Act. It is submitted by learned Seni