Suspension Of HOD In Sexual Harassment Case Builds Confidence In Employees, Prevents Abuse Of Power: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that suspension of head of department accused of sexual harassment builds confidence in women employees of his department and prevents abuse of power by the accused.Justice Ajit Kumar held, “Naturally if the employee is regularly discharging duties on a position that he holds as ahead of the department, in matters of complaint of sexual harassment where...
The Allahabad High Court has held that suspension of head of department accused of sexual harassment builds confidence in women employees of his department and prevents abuse of power by the accused.
Justice Ajit Kumar held, “Naturally if the employee is regularly discharging duties on a position that he holds as ahead of the department, in matters of complaint of sexual harassment where a decision is yet to be taken finally by the authority, the authority may place the said employee under suspension firstly as a confidence building measure amongst the working women in the department and secondly to ensure that such an officer may not abuse his position to pressurize other working women or otherwise also to the aggrieved women even while the final action is still pending consideration.”
Petitioner was working as District Programme Officer, Kushinagar when he was suspended by an order passed by Chief Secretary Child Development and Nutrition, Uttar Pradesh on grounds that words said do not amount to sexual harassment, the internal complaint committee was not duly constituted under the Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
Counsel for petitioner submitted that as per the statement of the complainant, the petitioner had called her fatty and had often suggested that she go on evening walks with him and also invited her to have meals with him. It was argued that this by itself does not constitute sexual harassment. It was also argued that procedure prescribed for dealing with such complaints was not followed by the internal complaints committee.
Per contra, counsel for respondent argued that body shaming of the complainant and all events taken together constituted sexual harassment under the Act. It was argued that since the petitioner's statement was recorded, he could not now say that he could not put up his defence. He should have filed an application before the internal complaints committee for cross-examination.
An FIR lodged against the petitioner regarding sexual harassment of another female was also brought on record before the Court to argue that many women working in petitioner's department have felt uncomfortable.
The Court observed that suspension is not a punishment but a measure to prevent the delinquent from influencing the proceedings against him.
“An employee is placed under suspension by the employer only to ensure that he is not able to influence the enquiry in any manner, in as much as he is not able to interfere with the evidence or also in such cases where the employer finds it necessary to place an employee under suspension so as to have smooth disposal of disciplinary proceedings.”
Holding that a head of a department's suspension pending inquiry leads to confidence building, the Court observed that the way in which the remark was made “may” constitute sexual harassment, however, it refrained from making any final remarks as the disciplinary proceedings were ongoing. It held that prima facie case was made out for suspension of the petitioner.
The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach the appellate authority.
Case Title: Shailendra Kumar Rai v. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 209 [WRIT - A No. - 6131 of 2025]
Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 209