RESHU SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
Discusses transfer policies, POSH Act implementation, and fairness in employment, applicable across various legal contexts.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-OS:9584-DB
Decision Date: 25-06-2025
List of Laws
The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013; The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC); Central Sanskrit University Act, 2020; Adarsh Scheme, 2022 guidelines; General Principles of Law
- The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013: The judgment discusses the petitioner's complaint under the 'Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013' (referred to as 'POSH Act, 2013') against an Assistant Professor. The Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) closed the proceedings, stating it could not reach a conclusion. The court notes the ICC's inability to decide on the complaint and directs the Management to issue notice for re-opening the POSH case to all stakeholders within 15 days. The ICC is then directed to take a decision on the re-opening of the POSH complaint and to take the POSH complaint to a logical conclusion. The judgment also notes that the petitioner's complaint under POSH triggered a reaction, which is admitted in the affidavit-in-reply, and the Management issued the impugned temporary transfer order.
- The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): The judgment mentions that the Petitioner filed a First Information Report (FIR) No.141 of 2023 with the Gamdevi Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, the judgment does not delve into the specifics or interpretation of these sections.
- Central Sanskrit University Act, 2020: The judgment mentions that the Central Sanskrit University Act, 2020 was introduced in April 2020. The judgment also refers to the scheme operated by the CSU (Central Sanskrit University) under which the Petitioner was appointed. The judgment also mentions that the Petitioner was entitled to be regularised under the scheme of CSU and that it was by the Judgment of this Court, that the Petitioner was granted permanency.
- Adarsh Scheme, 2022 guidelines: The judgment refers to ‘THE SCHEME FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO INSTITUTIONS RECOGNIZED AS ADARSH SANSKRIT MAHAVIDYALAYAS (ASM)/ADARSH SANSKRIT SHODH SANSTHANS (ASSS) -2022'. The judgment notes that the Respondent No.2 University has promptly responded to the problems in the Respondent No.4 institution, keeping in view the best interests of students and staff, CSU conveyed to the Respondent Nos.3 & 4, MDASM to suspend all academic activities and transfer the staff elsewhere, as per the vacancies available in other ASMs, as per Adarsh Scheme, 2022 guidelines. The judgment also mentions that the Petitioner can be accommodated, being a part of the Adarsh Scheme, in any college run under the Adarsh Scheme.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment touches upon principles related to transfer orders, particularly emphasizing that the temporary transfer order was unsustainable and unjustified. It also implicitly addresses principles of fairness and equity in employment, especially concerning the treatment of female employees and those with young children requiring medical attention. The court also considers the financial condition of the institution when deciding on back wages.
🔒 For Members Only