<p>The High Court has quashed the second show notice issued to a professor of Mangalore University, who was placed under suspension over allegations of sexual harassment to a project student. The court cited non adherence to procedural safeguards contained in administrative law (service rules) while issuing the second show cause notice with a possible penalty of dismissal from service.</p>.<p>The petitioner is working as a professor at the Department of Economics. The second show-cause notice was issued on November 5, 2020, based upon the report of the Internal Complaints Committee.</p>.<p>The allegation was made against the petitioner professor in 2018 which was converted into a complaint under section 9 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. The University placed the complaint for an enquiry before the Committee constituted in terms of the Act which held the petitioner guilty of the allegations. Subsequently, the syndicate accepted the report of the committee.</p>.<p>The syndicate had placed the petitioner under suspension before issuing the second show-cause notice. The bench observed that the order which places the petitioner under suspension indicates that the syndicate proposed to impose major punishment of dismissal from service invoking its power under the service rules.</p>.<p>“Dismissal being a penalty under the Service Rules, in my considered view, could not have been imposed without, at the outset, following the procedure stipulated in the Rules empowering the University to dismiss the petitioner from service,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said. The court cited the order of the Apex Court which held that an order of termination being passed on the basis of Internal Complaints Committee is illegal. </p>.<p>The court said that the decision to impose penalty of dismissal was an act without jurisdiction, as no inquiry as contemplated under the service rules was ever initiated. “The University is at liberty to initiate proceedings against the petitioner under the Service Rules by following the procedures stipulated therein and conclude the proceedings within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order,” the court said.</p>.<p>The complaint was lodged by a project student before the Karnataka State Commission for Women. This was communicated back to the University by the Commission to look into the complaint and take appropriate action.</p>
<p>The High Court has quashed the second show notice issued to a professor of Mangalore University, who was placed under suspension over allegations of sexual harassment to a project student. The court cited non adherence to procedural safeguards contained in administrative law (service rules) while issuing the second show cause notice with a possible penalty of dismissal from service.</p>.<p>The petitioner is working as a professor at the Department of Economics. The second show-cause notice was issued on November 5, 2020, based upon the report of the Internal Complaints Committee.</p>.<p>The allegation was made against the petitioner professor in 2018 which was converted into a complaint under section 9 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. The University placed the complaint for an enquiry before the Committee constituted in terms of the Act which held the petitioner guilty of the allegations. Subsequently, the syndicate accepted the report of the committee.</p>.<p>The syndicate had placed the petitioner under suspension before issuing the second show-cause notice. The bench observed that the order which places the petitioner under suspension indicates that the syndicate proposed to impose major punishment of dismissal from service invoking its power under the service rules.</p>.<p>“Dismissal being a penalty under the Service Rules, in my considered view, could not have been imposed without, at the outset, following the procedure stipulated in the Rules empowering the University to dismiss the petitioner from service,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said. The court cited the order of the Apex Court which held that an order of termination being passed on the basis of Internal Complaints Committee is illegal. </p>.<p>The court said that the decision to impose penalty of dismissal was an act without jurisdiction, as no inquiry as contemplated under the service rules was ever initiated. “The University is at liberty to initiate proceedings against the petitioner under the Service Rules by following the procedures stipulated therein and conclude the proceedings within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order,” the court said.</p>.<p>The complaint was lodged by a project student before the Karnataka State Commission for Women. This was communicated back to the University by the Commission to look into the complaint and take appropriate action.</p>