In a powerful affirmation of employee rights and the core principles of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (POSH) Act, 2013, the Bombay High Court on June 25, 2025, delivered a significant judgment quashing the retaliatory transfer orders issued against an assistant professor at Mumba Devi Adarsh Sanskrit Mahavidyalay. The Court held that the professor’s sudden and repeated transfers, following her formal complaint of sexual harassment, were not only arbitrary but a clear act of reprisal meant to intimidate and penalize her for invoking legal protections.

The petitioner had joined the institution in April 2018 and, in June 2023, filed a sexual harassment complaint against a fellow professor. The matter was formally registered at Gamdevi Police Station and forwarded to the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) as per statutory mandate. Shockingly, the ICC dismissed the complaint within ten days, citing an inconclusive outcome, despite a chargesheet being filed by the police. What followed was a chain of punitive transfers, first to Bhilwara in Rajasthan and later to Mathura in Uttar Pradesh, completely disregarding the complainant’s circumstances, including the critical medical needs of her three-year-old child.

In its stern observations, the Division Bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Ashwin Bhobe condemned the institution’s conduct, stating unequivocally that “no teacher can be treated in this manner, and surely not a lady teacher.” The Court recognized that the transfers were not administrative decisions made in good faith, but retaliatory measures directly linked to the filing of the POSH complaint. It further criticized the ICC for its failure to discharge its responsibilities under Sections 9 and 11 of the POSH Act, thereby denying the complainant a fair and unbiased inquiry into her allegations.

Responding to these procedural and ethical lapses, the Court issued a set of firm and corrective directions. It cancelled all the transfer orders and ordered the reinstatement of the petitioner to her original post in Nashik. Furthermore, the Court mandated the reopening of the POSH inquiry to ensure a proper investigation in line with statutory requirements. Recognizing the financial hardship faced by the petitioner due to institutional inaction, the Court also directed that she be paid 50% of her withheld salary from October 2023 until her return to work in July 2025.

This judgment is a resolute reminder to institutions that the POSH Act is not a formality but a protective mechanism that demands compliance in both letter and spirit. It affirms that the dignity, livelihood, and rights of complainants must be safeguarded, and that misuse of administrative tools like transfers to suppress complaints will not be tolerated under constitutional scrutiny. The ruling not only restores the petitioner’s position but also reasserts the judiciary’s commitment to fair process, gender justice, and institutional accountability.

Leave a Comment