Panjab University: After 5-hour debate, tainted professor's removal fails to get majority Senate vote

MIRED IN technicalities, the Panjab University Senate on Sunday failed to take a definitive decision regarding the sexual harassment case in which an assistant professor of the department of public administration was found guilty on two accounts.

For five hours, the Senate debated the reply to the show-cause notice issued to Prof Komal Singh, who has apologised in another case and is suspended for now. The professor has replied saying he has not done anything.

Double interpretation
According to the recommendation of the Panjab University Committee Against Sexual Harassment (PUCASH), the Vice-Chancellor proposed the punishment of dismissing him from service not disqualifying him for future job prospects. The matter was eventually put to vote, but the Senators failed to gather a two-third majority in the House in favour of removal. This, a Senator said, was technically required to dismiss a teacher from service.

Before the vote, a motion for dismissal from service without disqualification from future jobs was put forward. However, citing technical grounds, Senators in favour of demotion strongly opposed it. To this, Vice-Chancellor Arun Kumar Grover then proposed, “Instead of getting into technical complications, the vote should be based on two types of punishment to get a sense of what the House wants.”

Prof Grover personally opposed demotion, saying he did not want to endanger students by inviting the professor to continue to teach at PU and that the PUCASH called for “zero tolerance”. In a secret ballot system, out of 51 Senators, 32 voted in favour of removal, 18 in favour of demotion while one vote was rendered invalid. The House was adjourned with the V-C saying a legal opinion will be sought in the matter that was vehemently opposed by Senator Ajay Ranga.

Back and forth
Some Senators were of the view that the professor should be punished according to the “proportion of the misconduct”. They added that while they unanimously agreed that he should be punished, the same might be considered to be reduced on “humanitarian grounds”. Senators J C Mehta, J K Goswamy and Chaman Lal, among others, proposed that he should be demoted and be given a chance to reform.

Senator Ranga said, “Prof Komal Singh is not in the best of health and also has two minor children to take care of. Removal from service is too harsh a punishment and I can vouch that the case against him is not strong in the first place though I agree that he has misbehaved due to his drinking habits.” However, Senator Subhash Sharma opposed the view, saying, “This is the only way as the university has to set an example so that others don’t misuse their position to such an extent. If women don’t feel safe here, it brings a bad name to the university.”

In the matter of misconduct by a professor, there are three forms of punishment: the strictest being removal from service disqualifying from future job prospects, removal from service without disqualifying from future job prospects, and demotion with lowered payscale and benefits. Senator I S Chadha said, “The Senate has already taken a decision to impose immediate penalty. The show-cause notice was for the professor to explain why the penalty should not be imposed. Some members of the House are questioning the PUCASH investigation and this way, offenders will keep getting away.”

Woman senators silent
Barring PUCASH convener Prof Pam Rajput and Senator Neeru Malik, a majority of woman senators in the House were silent over the issue. In the session after lunch, Senator Rajput finally broke her silence, saying, “Does it have to be rape for us to feel offended now? We have made a mockery of the Sexual Harassment Act (Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013). It’s been three years now while the stipulated time for action to be taken is 90 days.”

She was replying to Senator Chaman Lal, who said, “My concern is social and legal. The person concerned here should be given maximum chance to reform. He hasn’t raped or attempted rape. It’s misconduct and it should be dealt with keeping in view as to what kind of society we want.” She added that violating the modesty of a woman was a crime. “If it’s the question of humanitarian and social responsibility, we can create a corpus for the education of the professor’s children. This is a test case for us and action has to be taken today,” she said.

Dean, University Instructions, Meenakshi Malhotra, spoke about the pending decision in light of the multiple complaints against an orthodontics professor at the H S Judge Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital. “We are already facing a severe case in the dental college. Offenders are getting emboldened; children place their trust in us and we cannot violate that. If we don’t take action today, a message will go out that the kids aren’t safe.”

She added that 50 girls came to her with complaints. “The dental college has 70 per cent female faculty. If they did not know, then it’s shameful and if they knew what was going on and didn’t act, it is even more shameful.”
News Source (Indian Express)