Inquiries into workplace harassment must strictly adhere to principles of natural justice, including recording evidence and providing the accused fair opportunity to be heard. Procedural lapses in these mandatory requirements invalidate any resultant disciplinary action and require de novo consideration of the complaints.

JUDGMENT :

SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

1. Petitioner, an Associate Professor-G of Astrophysics, is working at a premier Institute engaged in research in Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, namely, Harish Chandra Research Institute, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as “HCRI, Allahabad”).

2. Petitioner has claimed himself to be an internationally reputed Scientist of Astrophysics, an expert in the subject of Black Hole and Analogue Gravity and has published more than sixty research papers in intentionally reputed scientific journals.

3. Petitioner has faced an inquiry initiated by Internal Complaints Committee (hereinafter referred to as “ICC”) of HCRI, Allahabad constituted under Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “POSH Act”) as there were multiple complaints filed by girl students who have studied under the petitioner for purpose of Ph.D.

4. ICC initiated inquiry and sought petitioner’s response on complaints. According to record during proceedings some more complaints were also received against petitioner. The complaints were with regard to sexual harassment at workplace by petitioner, which includes physical contacts and advances and making sexually coloured remarks also.

5. Petitioner has asked various documents including copy of complaints and also asked for oral examination as well as cross- examination of complainants, however, it appears that during proceedings statements of victims/ complainants were even not recorded and considering gravity of the complaints, ignoring time period provided under Section 9 of POSH Act to take cognizance of complaints, inquiry was concluded and petitioner was found guilty.

6. For reference “Summary and Recommendations” of ICC are reproduced hereinafter:

“Summary and Recommendations

The Women Grievances’ Cell noted that:

As many as 10 women altogether have complained of sexual harassment and/or misconduct against Dr. Tapas K. Das and some of these complaints are backed-up with documentary proof or corroboration by other students.

At least 3 complaints are of a very serious nature. One of them has documentary evidence while both the others have corroboration from other students.

The women concerned are all very young and vulnerable, who could be easily manipulated, threatened and intimidated and who had many reasons to fear for their careers, and hence took time to complain against Dr. Das.

The incidents about which these women have complained spans a prolonged period of time between 2013 - 2016 during which Dr. Das has been involved in harassing and misconduct, making Dr. Das a serial harasser and repeat offender.

Most of the incidents of serious nature happened within his closed-door office and at very late in the night.

In his meeting with the Women’s Grievances’ Cell, Dr. Das has admitted to have sent an email with a link to pornography/erotica to one of the complainants. Dr. Das later denied this in his written response. But since Dr. Das had admitted to sending this link in his meeting with the committee on July 20, 2016 and since he had himself given the name of the recipient to whom he sent this link, and since the name he mentioned in the July 20, 2016 meeting matched with the name of the complainant who alleges that he sent this link to her, the committee concludes that Dr. Das is lying in his written response.

Given the volume of complaints, seriousness of the nature of complaints, and repeated misconduct by Dr. Das over a prolonged period of time, the Wome