Statutory sexual harassment inquiry and unlawful suspension rules made invalid committee and extended suspension unsustainable.

Prolonged suspension after detention in custody was unsustainable where it was repeatedly extended without a proper charge-sheet or contemporaneous justification, and the suspension order was quashed. In workplace sexual harassment matters, the 2013 Act occupies the field: inquiry must proceed through an Internal Complaints Committee constituted in the statutory manner, and a committee formed only under an earlier administrative notification without the mandatory composition lacks legal force. The regime also applies to girl students as aggrieved women within the statute. On that footing, the summary trial committee was treated as invalid, the challenge succeeded, and consequential service relief followed.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the order of suspension and its extensions were sustainable in law; (ii) whether the committee constituted for summary trial into the allegations of sexual harassment had legal force after the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and the amended service rules.

Issue (i): whether the order of suspension and its extensions were sustainable in law

Analysis: The order of suspension was passed immediately after detention in custody and was continued by repeated extensions. The governing rule required suspension on the basis of detention in custody beyond the prescribed threshold, and the suspension could not be prolonged indefinitely without a proper charge-sheet or contemporaneous justification. The prolonged continuation of suspension was found to be contrary to the legal principles governing suspension.

Conclusion: The suspension order and its extensions were held unsustainable and were quashed.

Issue (ii): whether the committee constituted for summary trial into the allegations of sexual harassment had legal force after the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and the amended service rules

Analysis: The workplace sexual harassment regime under the 2013 Act occupies the field and requires constitution of an Internal Complaints Committee in the manner prescribed by Section 4. Section 11 of the Act, read with the amended service rules, requires inquiry by the statutory complaints committee and treats such committee as the inquiring authority. A committee formed only under the earlier administrative notification, but not conforming to the mandatory composition and statutory requirements, does not retain legal force. The Act also applies to the girl students as aggrieved women within the meaning of the statute.

Conclusion: The summary trial committee was held to be without statutory force and its constitution was invalid.

Final Conclusion: The challenge succeeded, the impugned tribunal order was set aside, and the authorities were directed to restore the petitioner to service with consequential monetary relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where allegations of sexual harassment at the workplace are raised, inquiry must proceed through the statutory mechanism under the 2013 Act and the amended service rules, and any committee not constituted in accordance with that scheme lacks legal validity; prolonged suspension without proper justification is also unsustainable.

---