The Delhi High Court has quashed the suspension order issued against Ramanujan College Principal Prof. Rasal Singh, holding that a parallel fact-finding committee formed before the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) was not permitted under law.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said complaints under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (PoSH Act) must be examined only through the statutory mechanism created under the Act.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Prof. Rasal Singh challenging three actions: constitution of an ad hoc fact-finding committee by Delhi University, the committee’s report dated June 23, 2025, and the suspension order dated September 18, 2025.
The complaints had been made by three faculty members of Ramanujan College between March and April 2025, alleging misconduct including sexual harassment. Following this, Delhi University’s Deputy Registrar constituted a separate committee to examine the allegations.
The High Court clarified that an employer retains the inherent power to suspend an employee pending inquiry, even in matters involving PoSH complaints. The Court said such power flows from service law principles and institutional rules, not from the PoSH Act itself.
“The power of suspension vests with the employer,” the Court noted, adding that the PoSH Act neither creates nor removes that authority.
However, the Court found that creating an ad hoc committee to first examine whether the complaint should go to the ICC was contrary to the PoSH Act.
Justice Kaurav observed that the law provides a complete framework through the ICC or Local Committee, and any parallel inquiry body would undermine the statutory process.
“The creation of a fact finding committee… is de hors the provisions of the PoSH Act, and impermissible in law,” the judgment said.
The Court also noted that such unofficial committees may delay genuine complaints and lack the safeguards, confidentiality, and expertise required under the Act.
The Court further held that the wording of the suspension order itself was legally flawed because it described allegations as involving “serious misconduct and harassment” before any final inquiry finding.
According to the Court, such language could create a negative public impression and effectively punish a person before guilt is established.
“No person deserves to be met with such treatment, while an inquiry is pending,” the Court observed.
The Delhi High Court set aside the suspension order dated September 18, 2025. However, it granted liberty to Ramanujan College to issue a fresh order in accordance with law. The writ petition and pending applications were disposed of.
Case Details
Case Title: Prof. Rasal Singh v. University of Delhi & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 14760/2025
Judge: Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Decision Date: April 24, 2026
