Delhi High Court Quashes Suspension of Ramanujan College Principal in POSH Case

April 25, 2026 : The Delhi High Court has set aside the suspension of Professor Rasal Singh, Principal of Ramanujan College, in a sexual harassment matter, holding that the action was legally unsustainable.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav ruled that only an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) or a Local Committee constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 is competent to inquire into workplace sexual harassment complaints. The Court held that the creation of any parallel or ad hoc committee for such purposes is impermissible and violates both statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.

The Court found that the suspension order was stigmatic and had been issued before the completion of a proper inquiry under the POSH framework. It noted that the order relied on findings of a fact-finding committee constituted by the university, which has no legal recognition under the Act. The use of terms such as “serious misconduct and harassment” in the suspension order was held to be prejudicial, effectively penalizing the principal without due process.

The case stemmed from complaints filed in 2025 by three Assistant Professors. A fact-finding committee appointed by the Deputy Registrar examined the allegations and described them as serious, subsequently referring the matter to the university’s ICC. Based on this report, the college authorities suspended Professor Singh in September 2025, a decision that had earlier been stayed by the High Court.

In its final ruling, the Court underscored that POSH committees are specialized statutory bodies designed to handle sensitive complaints. It cautioned that parallel mechanisms not only undermine the integrity of the process but may also expose complainants to inappropriate environments and delay justice.

While clarifying that suspension is not expressly provided as an interim measure under the POSH Act, the Court observed that employers may still exercise such power under applicable service rules or contractual provisions. However, such decisions must be made with due application of mind and without causing undue prejudice.

Holding the suspension to be legally flawed, the Court allowed Professor Singh’s petition and quashed the order.