Delhi High Court Upholds Compulsory Retirement of DU Professor Over Sexual Harassment Allegations
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has affirmed the compulsory retirement of an assistant professor of political science at Delhi University’s Bharati College, who faced multiple allegations of sexual harassment from students. The court deemed the professor’s conduct “so profane” that it declined to include the objectionable messages in its judgment.
In a July 17 ruling, Justice Subramonium Prasad emphasized the profound impact of such misconduct on young students, stating, “Teachers shape the career of young aspiring students for a better future… The act of sexual harassment done by these very teachers, who are considered our guides and mentors, against young female students who have just attained majority, has a deleterious affect on the psyche of such students.”
the professor had contested the compulsory retirement orders issued by the college’s governing body in December 2020. The allegations stemmed from four complaints-three from current students and one from a former student of Bharati College-detailing sexual innuendoes and advances made through Facebook chats and WhatsApp messages.
These complaints emerged in February 2018, following the public release of a video showing students confronting the professor about his behavior. This incident triggered student protests and calls for an inquiry.
The matter was subsequently referred to the college’s Internal Complaints committee (ICC) in accordance with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) and UGC regulations. The ICC’s inquiry report, dated August 28, 2018, concluded that all charges against the professor were substantiated by both documentary and oral evidence.
The High Court found no reason to doubt the ICC’s assessment of the evidence and statements, noting that the testimony of each complainant remained unimpeached. The court also dismissed the professor’s claims of procedural irregularities, finding no violations in the constitution of the ICC or the conduct of the inquiry.
