New Delhi [India], September 23 : The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice to authorities on a plea by the suspended Principal of Ramanujan College, a Delhi University college, challenging his suspension over sexual harassment allegations.
Three teachers had lodged a complaint against him.
Justice Sachin Datta issued notice to the college and other respondents.
The High Court has directed the college to produce the relevant record before the court. The matter has been listed for hearing on September 26.
Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra appeared for Professor Rasal Singh. She prayed for a stay on the suspension order.
Justice Datta said, "We can't give a stay without hearing the other side. Come on Friday."
Rasal Singh challenged the suspension order, which was delivered to him via email on September 18.
A petition has been filed through Advocate Lakshay Saini, Prashanshika Thakur and Shalini Singh challenging the suspension order email dated September 18, 2025, wherein an interim suspension order has been passed against him.
It is stated in the petition that the complaint, purportedly informal and instigated at the behest of an Assistant Professor whose application for promotion had been considered, was incomplete, motivated, and an axe to grind against the Petitioner.
It is further stated that the said complaint was filed on March 13, 2025, one day after the promotion list was sent for consideration, excluding the name of Respondent (Z), who subsequently became a complainant.
The petitioner has contended that the said complaint is ex facie barred by limitation under Section 9 of the Prevention of Sexual Harrasment at Work Place (PoSH) Act, which mandates filing within three months of the last incident.
It is claimed that despite this statutory bar, the Petitioner was targeted on the basis of an
"informal complaint" filed out of vindictiveness and vendetta.
The Petitioner stated that he was aggrieved by an inquiry report of June 23, 2025, which was prepared without supplying any documents or copies of complaints to the Petitioner, thereby denying him the opportunity of participation, thereby violating his principles of natural justice.
The said Ad-hoc Committee was constituted behind the Petitioner's back by three
members of the Governing Body of the College who, wearing dual hats, both conducted the inquiry and later deliberated on its outcome, the plea alleged.
The petitioner has stated that the findings of the said Ad-hoc Committee of June 23, 2025, have no foundation in either the UGC Regulations, 2015 or the PoSH Act, 2013. The report of June 23, 2025, was extra-judicial, and the Petitioner was post facto asked to furnish a response and that too at the behest of the lawyer who was preparing the legal opinion rendered to the chairman of the Governing body.
Despite several requests, the outcome or copy of the legal opinion sought by the college was neither supplied nor intimated. It is well-settled that post-decisional hearing is no substitute for pre-decisional compliance with natural justice, the plea said.
On September 18, 2025, the Petitioner was placed under suspension as an interim measure. The said suspension order is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Section 12 of the PoSH Act and the UGC Regulations, 2015, the plea said.
The Petitioner said that he has not been informed of the constitution of any ICC, the outcome of any legal opinion, nor apprised of any recommendation of ICC, and hence no action could have been taken under Section 12.
It is stated that Section 12 of the PoSH Act does not contemplate suspension as an interim measure.