2025:MHC:59W.A.No.12 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.11.2024

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

and

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. ARUL MURUGAN

W.A.No.12 of 2022

Mary Rajasekran .. Appellant

vs

1.University of Madras,

Rep. by its Registrar, Chennai – 600 005.

2.Loyola College,

Rep. by its Secretary,

Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

3.The Rector,

Loyola College, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

4.The Provincial Society of Jesus,

Madurai Jesuit Province,

Beschi Campus, Karur Road, Dindigul – 624 001.

5.Rev.Fr.Xavier Alphonse SJ

Former Director,

Loyola College Alumni Association Co-ordinator,

Higher Education,

St.Joseph's College,Tiruchirapalli. .. Respondents

Prayer : Appeal filed under Section 15 of the Letters Patent against order

dated 25.08.2021 made in W.P.No.10364 of 2016.

For Appellant : Mr.T.Sri Krishna Bhagavat

For Respondents: Mr.Godson Swaminathan

for M/s.Issac Chambers

for R2 to R5

Mr.A.S.Vijayaraghavan for R1

1/17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

JUDGMENT

(Delivered by Dr. ANITA SUMANTH.,J)

The present writ appeal is filed by the writ petitioner in

W.P.No.10364 of 2016, hereinafter referred to as either writ petitioner or

appellant. Her prayer in the writ petition was for a mandamus directing

the Loyala College (College / R2 in writ petition) to permit her to rejoin

and continue her duties as Secretary to Rector of the College / R3, with

full backwages and benefits & direct the college to initiate enquiry against

R5 in the writ petition based on her complaint under the Sexual

Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and

Redressal) Act, 2013, (POSH Act) as well as compensation.

2. The Rector & the Vice-President of the College had filed

W.P.No.1298 of 2021, being aggrieved by an order passed by the Tamil

Nadu State Commission for Women (Commission), that had been

approached by the appellant also seeking reinstatement and

compensation.

3. The writ petitions were heard conjointly and a common order

passed on 25.08.2021 allowing W.P.No.1298 of 2021 (filed by the Rector

of the College) and dismissing the appellant's writ petition, W.P.No.10364

of 2016.

4. We have heard Mr.T.Sri Krishna Bhagavat, for the appellant,

Mr.A.S.Vijayaraghavan, for the University of Madras/R1 and Mr.Godson

Swaminathan, for the college as well as R5.

2/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

5. The case of the appellant is as follows. The appellant was

appointed as an Administrator of the college on 01.07.2000. The genesis

of her grievances was an event organised in the college by the alumni

association, of which both the appellant as well as her son were part.

According to the appellant, there was diversion of the donations received

from various sponsors by R5. Even prior thereto, the appellant has alleged

that there had been diversion of funds by R5, who was misappropriating

amounts from the college funds. She had also made allegations in regard

to his conduct and behaviour even going to the extent stating that he was

attempting to create a rift within her own family members.

6. Be that as it may, the crux of the submissions of the writ

petitioner before the writ court centred around on two facts, firstly, that

she had been terminated unfairly and seeking various benefits on this

account, and secondly, that there ought to have been a reference of her

complaint of sexual harassment to the appropriate committee constituted

under the POSH Act.

7. The University / R1 has no role to play in this matter and is

hence not even a necessary party.

8. It had been the defence of the other contesting parties i.e.,

College and R5 that the allegations put forth by the appellant were wholly

unfounded. They had denied that she had been a permanent staff of the

college and had averred that she had been paid all the amounts that had

been due to her, in time.

3/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

9. The appellant had approached the Commission seeking relief,

and the Commission, vide order dated 23.12.2020, found merit in the

appellant's contentions, granting her all the relief sought for. The writ

court has in the order impugned before us found that, the order passed by

the Commission was wholly arbitrary insofar as there had been no proper

enquiry conducted by the Commission, it was only the Chairperson who

had visited the college to conduct an enquiry and the other members of

the Commission had not been part of the process and there had been no

material whatsoever for the Commission to have passed order dated

23.12.2020 in the appellant's favour.

10.The writ petition filed by the Rector & Vice-President of the

College in W.P.No.1298 of 2021 had come to be allowed as against which

no writ appeal has been filed by the appellant. Thus, as far as the

demands of the appellant in regard to her employment, her status within

the college and the benefits, if any, that she was entitled to, are

concerned, order of the writ court dated 25.08.2021 has attained finality

and we have nothing more to say in that regard as the appellant has

accepted that order in full.

11.With this, the pleas of the appellant in her writ petition

relating to payments of backwages and other benefits also fail. As regards

the plea for reinstatement and continuance of her role as Secretary is

concerned, they have no relevance at this point in time as the appellant

today is stated be aged 65 years. Hence all that survives is the plea of the

4/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

appellant for a mandamus for reference of her complaint of sexual

harassment to the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the POSH

Act.

12.We have heard the rival contentions on this score and have

also carefully perused the order of the writ court in this regard. In order to

decide the question of whether a reference ought to be made to the ICC,

it is a pre-requisite that there be a compliant in the first place.

13.The writ court has rendered categoric findings to the effect

that the correspondences relied upon by the appellant do not, in fact,

reflect any complaint or cause for complaint at all. Much emphasis was

raised before the writ court and before us on a particular complaint, where

the words 'sexual harassment' figure. It has been the opinion of the writ

court that this would hardly suffice to warrant reference to the ICC as

there was no supporting particulars / details of the alleged sexual

harassment or any other justification to warrant a reference of the

complaint to the ICC. We are now to called upon to test this conclusion.

14.The first correspondence that have been relied upon by the

appellant via email dated 18.09.2013 is extracted below:-

“Dear Fr.Xavier Alphonse,

Your constant threat that I will be removed from Loyola

and harassment by creating problem within the family and

in the office has led to uncontrolled diabetes and mental

disturbance, stress and fracture around left shoulder.

1. I initiated Kaloori paathai with the intention of raising

funds for the school of commerce and economics. The

programme was well designed and I suggested to

approach SUN TV for telecast. It was not approved by you

and on the the contrary you abused Fr.Casmir Raj and me

5/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

stating that we were the cause for the failure of the Loyola

Alumni World Congress. I had been repeatedly telling you

that we had already approached SUN TV and they were

willing to give us one crore but you ignored everything and

isolated me from conducting the programme and made it

as your Family function thereby incurring a heavy loss to

the college.. Though the event was good there was

unhappiness among the Alumni members. When the

feedback was given to you, you did not take it in the right

spirit instead you only aggravated the situation and

disrupted the existing harmony.

2. You had told us that Fr.Casmir Raj was the cause for

Aban not coming forward to give donation to the school of

commerce because Fr.Casmir Raj had taken Mr.Regi

Abraham to Mr.Shyam Kothari's office and we all believed

you. But I was shocked to know that it was not the reason

and that Mr.Regi Abraham had himself requested

Fr.Casmir to take him to Mr.Shyam Kothari's office. He had

given Rs.20 lakhs for the good will of the college and

Fr.Casmiraj.

3. Fr.Secretary appointed me and 50% of my salary is

being paid by the Secretary and 50% by the Alumni office.

I am bound to work for Fr.Secretary if he assigns any work

and not only that it is my duty to give him due respect as

the Secretary of the College. Your allegation that I am

wasting my time spending with Fr.Secretary is not true.

And I make it clear that I work for the college and not for

any individual. Every time you harass me stating that

Fr.Albert William is against me and he wants you to give it

in writing to him a complaint so that he can terminate my

service. On further enquiry it is not true. You instigate me

to disrespect higher officials of the college. Fr.Albert has

not told anything against you but you only keep talking

about him always not only to me but also to my son. You

get angry with me because I took Fr Albert to Karti

Chidambaram to get 175% exemption.

4. Fr. I have realized one thing. You will go to any extent

to cover up your mistake. One example is getting a letter

from the LOHO members. Fr I don't understand how you

get a letter against against the one who works sincerely for

you. How do you expect me to work. I know everything

that is happening in the office, you will transfer funds from

the alumni account to Nagapatnam trust and get a letter

against me from the members. No man can serve two

masters at a time. You cannot collect funds for the college

and the trust at the same time.

5. The biggest blunder you are making is turning my son

against me. You talk to him about Fr Rector, Fr Albert,

Fr.Casimir, fr. Christie. You have given a projection that

you are the only saint and all the others are devils. You

have given a projection to my son that the entire

management is against me and that you are the only

6/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

person defending me. Recently when I spoke to Fr Rector I

did not speak bad about my son, daughter and husband

but you have told my son that Fr Rector has told you that I

spoke against my son, daughter and husband.

6. Mr. Balamurugan the present Secretary is helping you in

all the untoward activities. As a secretary he should focus

in the unity of the association but he is dividing the

association into two groups LOHO and the Chennai

members. You are favouring him. He has spread the

message among the members that you have instructed

them not to talk to me. Secondly, he has spread among

the members that my son is talking against me.

7. Fr. I am going to speak to Mr.Xavier Britto being a

family man, I am sure he will understand the feelings of a

mother.

I am not able to bear with your incessant and constant

harassment which has affected my body and mind

irreparably.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Rajasekaran”

15.This e-mail is addressed to R5. It does not refer to sexual

harassment anywhere. The gravamen on which the e-mail proceeds is the

threat posed by R5 in regard to the termination of the position of the

appellant in the college. The appellant makes allegations of diversion of

funds and the entirety of the e-mail leads one to the categoric conclusion

that there are differences of opinion between the appellant and R5 in

regard to conduct of the alumni event and the fund collections made. She

also refers to the involvement of her family viz., son, daughter and

husband in the disputes between herself and the college and is aggrieved

by the same. The important take away from e-mail dated 18.09.2013 is

that no allegation has been made or no indication had been given in

regard to improper behaviour of R5 towards the appellant.

7/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

16.The second communication referred to is letter dated

14.06.2014 addressed by the appellant to, among other people, the then

Commissioner of Police. The letter reads as follows:-

“Respected Sir,

I am Mrs. Mary Rajasekaran, working as a secretary to Fr.

Rector Loyola College, Chennai since January 2014. Prior

to this I was in the alumni office working with Fr.Casimirraj

and Xavier Alphonse, Director, Loyola alumni Association. I

am sharing this you with great confidence that you will act

with prudence and wisdom and also as an information. I

also came to understand that you are a straight forward

person.

Sir, I am associated with Loyola College since 2000 when I

joined LIBA and worked as a Secretary to Fr. Casimirraj, I

have worked in Stella Maris College for more than 10

years, and I also worked in Apollo Hospital during which

time I had an opportunity to work for the then CM Mr. MGR

and Madam Jayalalitha.

Sir, I am the mother of Mr. Joseph Kennedy an alumni of

Loyola and who has contributed very much to the college.

Today a complaint is given against him in Coimbatore

through your influence.

Sir, you know about the credentials of Fr. Casimirraj, I

don't have to tell you, I do not know how much you know

about Xavier Alphonse, if you look back, in 1995 he was

the Principal of Loyola College, he was there for 2 years

and removed because of swindling money to the tune of

crores, manipulation and may other complaints. He was

also kept for a day in a police station at Kodaikanal for

misbehaving with a lady. This is the credential of Xavier

Alphonse.

In 2010 when Fr. Casimirraj conducted the world alumni

congress, Fr. Casimirraj brought me back to Loyola College

from HCL to work for him for the congress. You know that

the congress was a great success. Sir, I have worked in

several places and wherever I worked I have earned a

good name. I really consider the days worked with Fr.

Casimirraj were the golden days, for the simple reason, he

is a man of excellence, simplicity, integrity, honesty and

highly intellectual.

Xavier Alphonse succeeded Fr. Casimirraj, initially I had no

problem with him, but slowly he started giving me trouble,

8/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

he wanted to use the funds to his advantage, which I

opposed. He started threatening me and harassing me.

Through Balamurugan, he got a letter from Mr. Suresh

Athithan in LOHO letter head against me. With this letter,

he started harassing me, my family members. He was

harassing me mentally, emotionally and sexually. I fell

very sick because of the stress. I did not give a police

complain, though many instigated me to do so, because I

felt that the institution name should not be tarnished.

Moreover, the management understood the severity of the

situation and came to my rescue and helped me to

overcome my stress.

At this juncture, I sent a very polished mail to the Rector,

Principal and the Secretary of the college. PFA the mail

sent by me to the management. Immediately they took

away the power of signing checks from Xavier Alphonse.

This triggered him further. Sir, if he wants to take action

against me, he can do it with the help of the management,

why should he involve the alumni members who have

nothing to do with me, unless and otherwise I get into a

rift with them. Off late I am getting threatening calls that I

should not work in the rector's office, and if I continue to

do so my life is in trouble. I have my own doubts, that this

is also arranged by Suresh Athithan. I have brought to the

notice of the management about the anonymous calls and

they have asked me to ignore it.

Sir, may I request you to kindly understand the situation

as an alumni of a prestigious college and relieve my son

and his friend who is also an alumni from this case.

Yours sincerely

Mary Rajasekaran”

17.It is in this communication that the appellant states 'he was

harassing me mentally, emotionally and sexually'. The basis of this letter

is the understanding of the appellant that a police complaint had been

filed by the college implicating her son and his friend. It was the plea of

the appellant before the Police Commissioner that such complaint should

not be pursued as against her son. In conclusion she asks the

Commissioner to relieve her son and his friend, who is also an alumni of

9/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

the College, from the case. Much as we may try, we do not find any

indication in this communication that the appellant was facing sexual

harassment that she wished should be enquired into.

18. No doubt the words in italics above are to the effect that R5 was

harassing the appellant mentally, emotionally and sexually. We however

find that statement incidental to the rest of the contents of the letter and

casual, in that it is bereft of any details whatsoever. We also do not find

any plea/request of the appellant asking the Commissioner, to whom the

letter was addressed, to take action with respect to her statement alleging

harassment.

19.The appellant had considerable experience in matters of

administration and would have known the procedure for such matters as

well as the impact of her chosen words. She was also obviously aware of

the fact that she was addressing a very senior Police official who had all

authority to look into such serious allegations, if only she had made such a

request. She however consciously desists from pursuing her statement

any further and the evident consequence is that no complaint was made

at all.

20.The third communication is dated 29.11.2015, and is an e-

mail addressed to more than dozen persons, extracted in the interests of

completion:-

Mr. Suresh Adithan,

I think it's about time that I step up and break my silence.

I have my own reasons for doing it now.

10/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

I had no knowledge about you, your family, professional

background etc. and I am sure you would say the same

thing about me and all this only baffles me as to why you

would write a malicious letter personally attacking me on a

LOHO letterhead??? So if anyone pays you money would

you write anything on any letterhead??? Did you even

mind about the names of those people which were on that

letter head? Were those people also endorsing the contents

of the letter? Were you not aware that you were about to

commit a heinous crime?

For the record, since when did Loyola Alumni Association

and LOHO have any MOU signed?? So who is being

irresponsiblehere!!! It was so damn obvious thatthe FAKE

NEWS CLOWN (Xavier Alphonse) had dictated the entire

letter as an insurance to threaten me for his acts of folly

and I am very sure he would have taken care of you very

well for obliging.

It also came to my attention that you are a bankrupt and

would do anything for money!!! That's a pretty damaging

profile record but why should you stoop down to such low

levels andplay havoc with my life and my family. WHY SO

MUCH SPITE??? Is that why you also made those

threatening calls to me!!! It is characterless individuals like

you who are convenient targets for vultures like XA who

always operate like a sly criminal.

Do you even know what the problem was between me and

Xavier Alphonse??? If someone gives you money you will

do anything??? Who are you...a thug!!! Ridiculous, I never

expected this kind of behavior from you and Balamurugan.

FYI XA was trying his best to embezzle the one crore

corpus from the alumni fund. It looked like I was the only

person between him and the money and he tried his

absolute best only before I alerted the management and

his signatory powers were removed. My complaint on this

matter is on the college record.

When there was a LOHO meet at Munnar, XA asked me not

to come, even when the Rector, Principal and others gave

me permission. He refused to give me permission, the

reason being that heis possessive of me and I should not

talk or interact with other Jesuits. What sort of a Jesuit

Priest would behave in this manner? Being a lady I had

kept quiet for many reasons. XA's moral compass was so

discorded that I could have slippered him but instead kept

quiet for the sake of the college.

11/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

During KallooriPaathai, it was you, Mr. Balamurugan and

Mr. Bose who made it to the top three whiners list. You

complained that you were not invited on stage. You made

a statement on behalf of LOHO that XA made it his family

function. Mr. Balamurugan was so insecure that he

pressured me to call him on stage to give away an award.

Mr. Bose was deeply upset that he wasn't called on stage?

It was so evident that all you people were working only for

APPLAUSE and not for a CAUSE!!

Also XA did the same when he bribed another bankrupt

criminal with several fraud cases against individuals and

State Bank of India (CIBIL Listed defaulter) by the name

Sivaramselvakumar to write a letter against his own peer,

the institution any my son in The Presidency Club.

However, the only difference is that you wrote it in your

name on the LOHO letterhead but this criminal sent an

anonymous letter to all the club members. It was again a

futile attempt as those who know my son, know my son.

The club members felt that dragging the name of an

institution in a social club was certainly not in good taste.

Either way it was all done under the instructions of XA.

When XA was confronted he first denied any knowledge

but later confessed and apologized to his peer for his part.

He even called my son several times on his phone a week

before he was transferred to Tiruchi. I STILL HAVE NO

CLUE WHY HE CALLED MY SON.

My son, being my son obviously does not believe in

shadow boxing and on the contrary he had directly

confronted XAand Rector& Principal for their manipulative

games for being a partner in crime and harboring a

criminal and a womanizer like XA. As a matter of fact the

Rector had pleaded with me and my son that we take

serious action against XA as the Jesuit society itself is

unable to deal with him. He also used a metaphor of a

STREET DOG to make comparisons with XA. He gave us

two options either to take action against XA or just step

aside. We decided to go with the former and undertook all

measures to take very serious legal action against XA

especially with all the evidence we had gathered against

him. It was he who called for a compromise and came

crying like a gigantic loser. He pleaded with me and my

son that we don't initiate any action against him.

I also want to state on record that I was almost prepared

to file serious harassment charge with the Commissioner of

Police in Chennal against XA. He harassed me so much

that I had developed a stress related illness and was

hospitalized for 3 months. And because the Rector pleaded

with me and for the sake of the institutions name I did not

press any charges.

12/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

All those who were involved in this scam, if you people

came from a good family, you LOHO members would

checked with me before sending out such an irresponsible

communication. Do you people consider your LOHO forum

to be an internationally reputed one??? It only proves

beyond doubt that it is a forum on paper with some

characterless individuals at the helm who are crazy for

attention, power, money and position.

Also in my assessment the LOHO group which often visited

the alumni office, always came with a hidden agenda, and

no wonder you were all sidelined for the world Alumni

Congress.

Bottom line I would pretty much peg all the problems in

the Loyola Alumni Association to the current secretary Mr.

Balamurugan who has been doing nothing but a great

disservice to the committee. Many even questioned me

over a period of time if he is the secretary for LOHO or

LAA!!! Such was the influx of LOHO members in the Loyola

Alumni Committee. He has not only failed miserably as a

secretary but is only concerned about safeguarding his

position as the secretary. I take the liberty in stating this

since I was the one who recommended his name to the

college authorities hoping he would so some good.

Also the mail sent by George Michael was absolutely true.

The past history of Xavier Alphonsa clearly states that he

had paid an hefty amount between Rs.50,00,000 lacs to

One crore as a settlement to a lady with whom he had an

affair with and spoil her life as well. Did anyone care to

find out the source of this Settlement!!!

Another member who instigated XA was Mr Maria Antony

Irudayaraj who came with a proposal for placement of

engineering students since his daughter was studying

engineering he said we can make good money, he offered

this proposal to one Mr. Biji he flatly refused saying we

come to the college to give back to the college and not to

make money. Since we did not entertain him, he poisoned

XA against me. This information XA himself shared with

me. He further added that all the Jesuits in the community

were against me because I am a well wisher of Fr.

Casimirraj and that XA alone is protecting and defending

me. When I checked with the fathers they all laughed at

me saying please don't take it seriously he is like that.

It is really disheartening to note that a lady was tortured

so much and there was no one to come to my rescue. If

your wife or sister was in my place, will she also get the

same treatment?

13/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

I now make an appeal to the non LOHO members of the

alumni association to choose a faculty member of the

college for the secretary position in the interest of

safeguarding the reputation of the college. Earlier this was

the practice, XA changed everything to suit his

convenience.

Not only did you misuse the office of Mr. AKV to give a

fake complaint against my son, I havenow gathered so

muchinformation against XA by which I will be placing on

record on my complaint against you withMr AKV for

entertaining XA to torture, harass me mentally, physically

and sexually. I now demand you for an apology letter on

the LOHO letterhead falling which I will be forced to take

severe action against you and XA. You better ask him to

dictate an apology letter. I am not going to spare you

people, I will take this matter to the Women's Right Forum

and the Ministry of Minority Affairs.

I am really ashamed to know the fact that you possess

zero moral values.

Mrs. Mary Rajasekaran”

21.In this letter as well, the appellant has vented various

grievances as against the college, particularly R5 and all the problems

relate to funding. In fact in this e-mail she says that she was almost

prepared ‘to file serious harassment charge with the Commissioner of Police in

Chennal against XA. He harassed me so much that I had developed a stress

related illness and was hospitalized for 3 months, And because the Rector pleaded

with me and for the sake of the institutions name I did not press any charges’. To

our mind, this would establish the position that she had, in fact, never filed

any charges for sexual harassment against R5 and hence the question of

referring the complaint to the ICC does not arise.

22.Section 9 of the POSH Act relates to filing of a complaint of

sexual harassment. We are cognizant that, bearing in mind the position of

14/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

a victim of sexual harassment, it would be extremely difficult to make an

allegation of sexual harassment either orally or in writing, particularly as

against persons holding senior positions.

23.Hence, there must be a purposeful understanding and

interpretation of Section 9. Even the slightest allegation of sexual

harassment must be viewed and taken seriously by the Institution and

forwarded to the appropriate committee for proper action.

24.It is also unnecessary that the complaint be graphic in detail

or contains, even at the first instance, all details of the allegations of

harassment. It would suffice that the primary details of the alleged

occurrence be available on record, in order to trigger the proceedings in

this regard. That apart, a complaint may be made to any person in the

Institution, who would then be duty bound to forward the same to the

authorities for appropriate action.

25.To this extent, we would disagree with the learned Judge,

who has required that the complaint itself be detailed, containing all

particulars of the occurrences. In our view, intricate details may not be

necessary at the very first instance and once a complaint, even if sketchy,

but clearly alleging sexual harassment, providing primary details and

seeking redressal, is received, such a complaint assumes the character of

a complaint under Section of the Act. It is then mandatory for the

authority concerned/ICC to cause enquiry and take a decision if the

complaint warrants/merits further investigation.

15/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

26.Since Section 9 requires a specific complaint to be filed in

order that requisite action be initiated, incidental reference to sexual

harassment cannot be escalated, or equated to the level of a statutory

complaint. In the present case, the appellant has not outlined any primary

details of the alleged sexual harassment. Equally importantly, she has not

demonstrated any inclination to complain and seek redressal as against

her grievances. In fact, in one of her communications, dated .29.11.2015,

she says as much, stating that the behaviour of R5 had almost led to her

filing of a complaint of harassment. Thus, even as per her admission,

there was no complaint filed.

27.In order to assuage our conscience that there is an ICC in

place to address complaints of sexual harassment, if made, we had

directed that the details of constitution of the ICC in the college be

produced before us. By way of compilation dated 25.11.2024, the

constitution of the Anti-Sexual Harassment committees for the years 2012

– 13 onwards till present i.e., 2024 – 2025 have been placed before us.

28.With this, we see no further requirement to intervene in the

order of the writ court and this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.

[A.S.M., J] [G.A.M., J]

27.11.2024

Index:Yes

Neutral Citation:Yes

ssm

To

16/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.12 of 2022

The Registrar,

University of Madras, Chennai – 600 005.

DR. ANITA SUMANTH.,J.

and

G. ARUL MURUGAN.,J.

ssm

W.A.No.12 of 2022

27.11.2024

17/17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis