3 Answers
Dear Client,
The ICC may consider whether the complaint was filed within the POSH Act’s usual three-month period from the incident or last incident, with a written extension of up to a further three months. But since it accepted your complaint, collected your evidence, received the respondent’s reply, and proceeded with rebuttal, it should decide the complaint through a fair inquiry and give a written, reasoned final finding. It should not simply demand a new incident of harassment to avoid examining the complaint already registered.
Write to the ICC requesting the exact Supreme Court judgment it relies on, its written decision on delay, the applicable university POSH rules, the questioning schedule, and a final reasoned order. State that your earlier disclosure to the former ICC Chairperson, your guide change, and any coexistent messages that is relevant evidence. Lastly, keep copies of every letter, email, complaint, acknowledgment, and ICC communication. If the ICC closes the complaint, immediately obtain its written report and use the appeal mechanism in your university’s POSH policy. If that remedy is unavailable or the process was arbitrary or unfair, consult a POSH lawyer about approaching the High Court under Article 226. A police complaint under BNS section 75 is also possible if the alleged conduct fits sexual harassment.
I hope this answer helps, if you have any other query kindly do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you.
Dear Client
The matter at hand needs to be carefully analyzed in terms of the limitation aspect under POSH Act as well as the process followed by ICC.
As per Section 9 of POSH Act, there should be a complaint usually within three months from the date of incident, or within three months from last incident in case of multiple incidents. The ICC can extend this by a further period not exceeding three months where circumstances prevented timely filing. Moreover, the Supreme Court has recently reiterated that such a statutory limitation cannot usually be extended beyond six months from the date of the last incident.
As such, since your alleged incidents took place almost two years back, the ICC may be investigating whether or not your initial claim was maintainable from a legal perspective. However, your letter to the former Chairperson of the ICC and the reason for not filing the claim should still be recorded and submitted to the Committee.
Do not manufacture or create another “mental harassment” incident in order to avoid the limitation period. Mental harassment by itself is not automatically a POSH complaint; the alleged conduct must fall within the statutory concept of sexual harassment. If there has genuinely been no recent conduct by the professor, you should state this clearly in writing.
You should ask the ICC to state its present position in writing and explain what steps it proposes to take regarding the delay despite the earlier condonation. Keep copies of your original complaint, condonation application, correspondence with the ICC, respondent’s reply, your rejoinder, and all notices and communications. In case the decision turns out to be unfavourable, get the order in writing and take note of the possible legal recourse.
I hope this answer helps. If you have any further query kindly do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you.
Dear Client,
Under the POSH Act, once the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) has formally accepted and condoned the delay under the proviso to Section 9(1) and commenced the inquiry, it cannot arbitrarily reverse its stance at the evidence stage or coerce you into fabricating fresh allegations of recent harassment simply because the respondent cited case law. Burden of proof does not mean shouldering procedural harassment by the committee itself; their abrupt shift indicates serious procedural irregularities and a failure to adhere to statutory inquiry rules. To properly safeguard your academic standing, challenge any unlawful closure, and decide whether to compel a fair inquiry we need to examine your submitted complaints, the delay condonation, the respondent’s reply, and the ICC’s written notices, for which you may opt for a one-on-one consultation with us to formulate an immediate legal strategy.
Hope this clarifies your position.
OLQ LAW FIRM