The Vice-President and Chancellor of Panjab University (PU), Mohammad Hamid Ansari, has stated that it is for the Senate, the governing body of the university, to decide on what action is to be taken in the case pertaining to the sexual harassment complaint filed against Vice-Chancellor Arun Kumar Grover by a Fellow of the campus.
The university had forwarded a report prepared by the sexual harassment committee in the matter to the Chancellor’s office for action. However, in a three-page letter sent to the university by the Chancellor’s office on January 20, reference has been made to Article 10 of the PU calendar, which mentions that the role of the Chancellor is limited to appointing the VC and determining the amount of remuneration and other conditions of service.
According to Article 11 (2) of the PU Act, the responsibility of the entire management of the university affairs, including supervision and control of work places, lies solely with the PU Senate.
In the communication, it has been clearly mentioned that according to the PU Act, the Senate is empowered to act as employer, even when the matter involves the VC and Senators.
Referring to the complaint against the VC, the Chancellor’s office stated as the Senate was responsible for the entire management of all affairs of the university, it “is the employer as defined in the sexual harassment Act”.
The Chancellor’s office stated that it appeared that the decision of the PU Senate and the legal opinion received by the university to forward the report to the Chancellor for action was based solely on the interpretation of the Human Resource Development Ministry, which was unaware of the PU Act.
Sources said the letter received from the Chancellor’s office would be tabled at a meeting of the Syndicate on February 6, and also at a Senate meeting, scheduled for March.
The university had forwarded a report prepared by the sexual harassment committee in the matter to the Chancellor’s office for action. However, in a three-page letter sent to the university by the Chancellor’s office on January 20, reference has been made to Article 10 of the PU calendar, which mentions that the role of the Chancellor is limited to appointing the VC and determining the amount of remuneration and other conditions of service.
According to Article 11 (2) of the PU Act, the responsibility of the entire management of the university affairs, including supervision and control of work places, lies solely with the PU Senate.
In the communication, it has been clearly mentioned that according to the PU Act, the Senate is empowered to act as employer, even when the matter involves the VC and Senators.
Referring to the complaint against the VC, the Chancellor’s office stated as the Senate was responsible for the entire management of all affairs of the university, it “is the employer as defined in the sexual harassment Act”.
The Chancellor’s office stated that it appeared that the decision of the PU Senate and the legal opinion received by the university to forward the report to the Chancellor for action was based solely on the interpretation of the Human Resource Development Ministry, which was unaware of the PU Act.
Sources said the letter received from the Chancellor’s office would be tabled at a meeting of the Syndicate on February 6, and also at a Senate meeting, scheduled for March.
