POSH Act Inquiry Constitutes Initiation of Disciplinary Proceedings Under University Act: Kerala High Court - 2025-10-07

Law Updates Made Simple.

POSH Act Inquiry Qualifies as Disciplinary Proceedings for Suspension, Kerala High Court Rules

ERNAKULAM: In a significant judgment harmonizing service law with workplace safety legislation, the Kerala High Court has ruled that an inquiry initiated by an Internal Committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) can be treated as the "initiation of disciplinary proceedings" under the Calicut University Act, 1975.

The Division Bench, comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S.TH , set aside a single judge's decision and directed Farook College to complete the disciplinary proceedings against an Assistant Professor accused of sexual harassment within two months. The court held that suspending an employee immediately after constituting a POSH inquiry committee is legally valid, even if a formal charge-sheet under university statutes has not yet been issued.

Background of the Case

The case originated from a writ petition filed by Kamarudheen P.A, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Malayalam at Farook College. He was suspended on February 14, 2020, following a sexual harassment complaint filed by a student on February 13, 2020. The college management had constituted an Internal Committee under the POSH Act on the same day the complaint was received.

The professor challenged his prolonged suspension, arguing it was illegal under Section 60(2) of the Calicut University Act, which states that a teacher can only be suspended "when disciplinary proceedings are initiated against him." He contended that disciplinary proceedings only commence with the issuance of a formal charge memo, which in his case was served much later, in January 2024.

Arguments Presented

• Appellant's (Professor's) Contention: The senior counsel for the professor argued that the suspension was void from the start as it preceded the formal charge-sheet. Citing precedents, it was submitted that a suspension pending a "contemplated" inquiry is impermissible and that proceedings are only "initiated" upon the service of charges. He also challenged the Vice-Chancellor's extension of time for the inquiry, claiming he was not properly heard.

• Respondents' (College and University's) Contention: The counsel for the college management argued that the POSH Act, a special statute, mandates immediate action. The constitution of an Internal Committee on the very day of the complaint constituted the initiation of proceedings. They submitted that delays in the inquiry were caused by the police seizing records and the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, they pointed out that the professor had participated in the inquiry and had assured cooperation before challenging the suspension at a late stage.

Harmonizing the POSH Act and University Statutes

The Division Bench undertook a detailed analysis, distinguishing this case from earlier precedents that were decided before the enactment of the POSH Act. The court emphasized that the POSH Act was created to protect women's fundamental rights to equality, life, and dignity, ensuring a safe working environment.

The judgment noted that Sections 11 and 13 of the POSH Act intrinsically link the Internal Committee's inquiry to the service rules of the employee. If the committee finds the allegations to be proven, it recommends action "in accordance with the provisions of the service rules."

In a pivotal observation, the court stated:

"When Section 11 read with Section 13 of the POSH Act makes it clear that the internal committee...shall recommend the employer...to take action for sexual harassment as a misconduct in accordance with the provisions of the Service Rules applicable to the delinquent, there is no meaning in saying that the delinquent can be suspended from service only after initiating disciplinary proceedings under the relevant Service Rules. If such an interpretation is given to the provisions of POSH Act, the purpose of the Act will become otiose."

The court concluded that a harmonious construction was necessary.

"Therefore, while considering the relevant provisions under the POSH Act with that of the Calicut University Act, we are of the considered opinion that the inquiry conducted by the internal committee or local committee as provided under Section 11 of the POSH Act can also be treated as initiation of disciplinary proceedings for the purpose of Section 60(2) of the Calicut University Act."

Final Decision and Implications

The court found no reason to interfere with the disciplinary proceedings, noting that the professor had participated in them and that the proceedings were stalled only due to an interim stay he obtained.

While setting aside the single judge's order dismissing the writ petition, the Division Bench disposed of the appeals with a clear directive. It ordered the college management to complete the disciplinary proceedings against the appellant "as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment."

This ruling provides crucial clarity for educational institutions and other employers on the procedural interplay between the POSH Act and their specific service rules, affirming their power to take immediate preventive action, such as suspension, upon receiving a complaint of sexual harassment.