The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the constitution of the Internal Complaint Committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

JUDGMENT :

Arun Monga, J.

1. Impugned herein, inter alia, are Punjab University (for short PU) Senate proceedings dated 21.01.2017 and 29.01.2017; Syndicate proceedings dated 10.01.2018 and 17.02.2018; and letters dated 20.03.2018 and 19.07.2018 being Annexures P-20, P-21, P-24, P-25, P-27 and P-31, respectively. The same are stated to be in violation of provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (for short 'the Act').

2. A consequential relief for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or otherwise has been sought directing respondent No.1 the Chancellor of the University to constitute/nominate a Committee to inquire into the complaint of the petitioner, as per the provisions of the Act.

3. The case in hand pertains to a complaint of sexual harassment by a lady Professor, perhaps, one of the Senior most Professors in the country against the then Vice Chancellor of the University with an underline thread that such a harassment creates an unequal work field for women in India. The petitioner is stated to have more than 03 decades of teaching experience to her credit as a Professor and also has been a Senator and remained a Syndic (Member of the Syndicate) of the University. The memo of parties filed originally in the writ petition cited the name of the complaint (petitioner)/victim and the alleged perpetrator (respondent No.3) of sexual harassment. But taking notice of serious nature of allegations levelled by the petitioner against respondent No.3, it was felt that the veracity and the outcome of the adjudication would have the potential of harming the reputation of either of parties, depending upon eventual outcome of the adjudication of the complaint filed by petitioner. In the premise, given that the right to privacy and right to live with dignity are inherent under Article 21 of Constitution of India, vide an order passed by this Court, it was directed to change the title of the case by stating the petitioner as Madam 'X' and respondent No.3 as Mr. 'Y'.

4. The increasing issue of sexual harassment at work places was taken up by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India by way of public interest litigation, leading to, what is now a celebrated judgment in this field, known as "Vishaka" (Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241). The Apex Court noticed that the incidence of sexual harassment results in violation of Fundamental Rights of 'Gender Equality' and 'Right to Life and Liberty'. The same, therefore, impinges upon Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Stressing upon 'Right to Life to be Life with dignity', Hon'ble the Apex Court laid down certain guidelines under Article 142 of Constitution of India by invoking the concept of judicial legislation in order to provide protection to the working women from sexual harassment at their work places.

5. Some of the guidelines laid down in the Vishaka's judgment are extracted as under:

"1. Duty of the employer or other responsible persons in workplaces and other institutions:

It shall be the duty of the employer or other responsible persons in workplaces or other institutions to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all steps required.

2. Definition:

For this purpose, sexual harassment includes such unwelcome sexually determined behaviour (whether directly or by implication) as:

(a) physical contact and advances;

(b) a demand or request for sexual favours;

(c) sexually-coloured remarks;

(d) showing pornography;

(e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or nonverbal conduct of sexual nature.

Where any of these acts is committed in circumstances whereunder the victim of such conduct has a reasonable apprehension that in relation to the victim's employment or work whether she is drawing salary, or honorarium or voluntary, whether in government, public or private enterpris