Telangana HC Suspends Rustication Of BITS Pilani Student Over Sexual Harassment Allegations Citing Non-Compliance Of UGC Regulations By ICC

The Telangana High Court has temporarily suspended an order rusticating a second-year female student of BITS Pilani, after noting that it was passed without following the provisions of the UGC (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Educational lnstitutions) Regulations, 2015. 

For context, Regulation 8 mandates that a copy of the complaint should be furnished on the accused individual and they should be given 10 days to reply to the allegations.

Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy passed the interim order while hearing the student who had challenged her rustication by the college as illegal and against the UGC Regulations 2015.

The petitioner has claimed that her rustication also violates of her rights under Articles 14, 19(1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner has claimed that the Internal Complaints Committee of the institution had recommended her rustication after inquiring into certain complaints by students containing allegations of sexual harassment and her involvement in it.

"No doubt, serious allegations are made against the petitioner. However, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 7 (BITS Pilani) did not dispute the fact that copy of complaint and documents available with ICC have not been furnished to the petitioner," the court noted. 

Noting the punishments which can be imposed under Regulation 10 includes– suspend or restrict entry into the campus, expel and strike off name from the rolls etc., the court said:

"The consequence of imposing punishment is serious and it will have bearing on the future of the student as the provisions of UGC Regulations are penal in nature. Thus, there cannot be any doubt that all the provisions are mandatory. The contention of learned standing counsel that petitioner did not seek for a copy of complaint and documents and she has admitted the guilt is of no consequence as there cannot be any estoppel against the statute. As per Regulation 8 (1), the ICC should have furnished a copy of complaint to the petitioner within a period of seven (7) days of such receipt. Further, as per Regulation 8(2), petitioner has' ten (10) days time to submit reply to the complaint". 

"In the above circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that there are lapses on the part of ICC in following the procedure mandated under the provisions of UGC Regulations 2015 and POSH Act. Hence, there shall be interim suspension of the letter dated 12.11.2024 issued by respondent No.7 Committee and recommendatiorrs dated 10.11.2024 of respondent No.7 of respondent No.3 institution until further orders," the court added.

However, considering that the petitioner is facing serious allegations and interest of several students would be in jeopardy, the court said that BITS Pilani is at liberty to impose reasonable restrictions, so as to ensure that petitioner does not repeat any such alleged objectionable conduct and indiscipline in future.

Background:

The petitioner has alleged that on November 9, 2024, the hostel warden along with two other persons entered her room without permission, began yelling at her, confiscated all her electronic gadgets including her phone and laptop, and escorted her out of her hostel in a rash manner. She has claimed that when she reached outside the hostel, she saw a professor of her's waiting downstairs. The professor escorted her into room, where the petitioner was enquired by two professors for almost 3 hours. During this time, she has claimed that she was threatened repeatedly and forced to give a statement as per the liking of the professors. She claims that throughout this process, she was never informed what the issue was, and only vague indications were made that an anonymous complaint had been received against her by another student.

The petitioner's counsel argued that she was not furnished with a copy of complaint as mandated under Regulation 7 and 8 of the UGC Regulations 2015. Petitioner was called to join the meeting by the Chairman of lnternal Complaints Committee on 09.11.2024. The Chairman of IGC was present along with another person; an external person joined them subsequently. Petitioner was asked to give statement on the said date. Petitioner was not given opportunity to defend her case, he said. Thus, there is violation of principles of natural justice and impugned proceedings are liable to be suspended, the counsel added. 

The institution's counsel argued that petitioner has exhausted her appeal remedy. There is a remedy of appeal under Section 18 of the POSH Act as well as Regulation 8 (5) of the UGC Regulations 2015. Petitioner has already filed appeal before the Executive Authority in terms of Regulation I (5) of the UGC Regulations 2015. Assuming that University is amenable to writ jurisdiction, there is no element of public function involved in this case and thus writ petition is not maintainable. It was argued that no violation of statutory or fundamental right had happened as enquiry is conducted in accordance with the provisions of POSH Act, UGC Regulations 2015. There are 6000 students in the campus and enquiry was conducted by 6 members of ICC and out of six members there is an external member and four student members, and no malafides can be attributed to them.

It was submitted that petitioner admitted her guilt during the enquiry, thus no lapses were committed by ICC with regard to non-furnishing of copy of complaint. The Regulation 8 of UGC Regulations 2015 would be immaterial as no prejudice is caused to the petitioner. During the enquiry, petitioner did not raise any objection with regard to the non-service of complaint or documents. The enquiry was conducted exhaustively. lf interim order is granted, it will send a wrong signal and environment in the campus will be polluted as petitioner has indulged in indiscipline and her conduct is objectionable, it was argued. 

The matter is next listed on June 25. 

Case title: X v/s State of Telangana & Others 

Counsel for petitioner: Y Soma Srinath Reddy 

Counsel for respondents: Rama Krishna Murthy, SC for University. 

Click Here To Read Order