Ajit Kumar Singh's Challenge to ICC Proceedings Under POSH Act Dismissed Pending GSFC Confirmation
In a notable decision, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed by Ajit Kumar Singh against the constitution and findings of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013. Singh, a Sub-Inspector in the Border Security Force (BSF), challenged the ICC's findings that were yet to be confirmed by the General Security Force Court (GSFC).
The petition, filed under W.P.(C) 3064 of 2026, was heard by Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora. Singh sought the quashing of several orders, including those related to the reconstitution of the ICC, the findings of the ICC, and subsequent disciplinary actions initiated against him. The petition also called for a fresh inquiry by a newly constituted ICC under the POSH Act.
The crux of the matter revolved around an alleged incident on January 14, 2025, where Singh was accused of misconduct against a female constable. The ICC, upon inquiry, found Singh blameworthy and recommended disciplinary action. However, Singh contested the ICC's composition and its proceedings, citing procedural lapses and a violation of natural justice principles.
Justice Rao, while delivering the judgment, emphasized that the petition was premature as the findings of the GSFC were pending confirmation by the competent authority. The court highlighted that procedural fairness would be addressed through pre-confirmation and post-confirmation remedies as per the Border Security Force Rules, 1969.
The court reiterated the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before invoking writ jurisdiction. Singh's counsel, Mr. Arjun Pawar, argued that the ICC's composition was flawed and that the proceedings were not in accordance with the POSH Act. However, the court found no merit in interfering at this stage and dismissed the petition, allowing Singh to raise his contentions post-confirmation of the GSFC findings.
This decision underscores the judiciary's stance on respecting procedural hierarchies and the importance of exhausting available remedies before approaching the courts.
Bottom Line:
The petition challenging the constitution and findings of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, and subsequent disciplinary actions, was dismissed as premature because the findings of the General Security Force Court (GSFC) were yet to be confirmed by the competent authority.
Statutory provision(s):
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, Border Security Force Act, 1968, Border Security Force Rules, 1969
Ajit Kumar Singh v. Union of India, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2874648
