PRESS RELEASE, 15.1.14

The DUTA is shocked to see the Notification dated 13.1.14 issued by the Registrar, Ms. Alka Sharma, announcing that the Delhi University Ordinance XV(D) has been superseded by the Parliament law on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. The DUTA condemns this Notification for the following, among many other, reasons:

1. Under the Delhi University Act, it is the Executive Council that has the sole authority to make, repeal and amend Ordinances. Any changes envisaged in Ordinances as a result of the new Parliamentary Law must be first discussed in the Executive Council,which would have to apply its mind to examine which are the changes necessary in the light of the new Law, and thereby frame appropriate amendments. The Registrar has absolutely no authority to make unilateral announcements in this regard.
2. The new notified Law must be reported in a meeting of the Executive Council, which should then set up a committee including some legal experts specializing in gender issues, to examine the implications for Ordinance XV(D). This committee should propose amendments in the Ordinance to fulfill the requirements of the new Law.
3. There is no provision in the new Law that requires the dissolution of committees and provisions that are not in contradiction to the stipulations in the new Law. For example, the requirement that complaints committees are standing committees with representation from all sections of employees is fulfilled by the provisions in Ordinance XV(D).
4. In the University, students are important stakeholders, and have therefore been given representation in committees by Ordinance XV(D). This does not contradict the provisions laid down in the new Law, but only supplements it.
5. Similarly, the provision of election to the committees is not in contradiction to the provisions of the new Law, since this method has been devised by the Executive Council itself. In our experience in Delhi University, it is the violation of this important aspect of Ordinance XV(D) that has led to denial of justice with tragic consequences as in the case of PavitraBhardwaj.
6. The gender neutrality of Ordinance XV(D) expands and enhances the new Law, but in no way violates it. In fact, in the Ramjas college case, this aspect was objected to by the accused, but the Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld its constitutionality.
7. At no stage can there be a vacuum in terms of a mechanism to deal with complaints. Until Ordinance XV(D) is duly amended to comply with the new Law, it must continue to operate. Pending cases must, in any case, be examined under the existing Ordinances.
8. The unholy haste in superseding Ordinance XV(D), which had been carefully worked out over six years following the Vishaka judgment, will open the floodgates for sexual harassment, and will put a question mark on the University’s commitment to providing an environment free of gender violence.

The DUTA demands that the said Notification by the Registrar be withdrawn and the matter placed before the Executive Council for its consideration.