Gauhati High Court
Dr Pranoy Dey vs The State Of Assam And Ors on 6 August, 2025
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010173632025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4452/2025
DR PRANOY DEY
R/O HOUSE NO. 12 MAHENDRA SUBWAY ADARSHAPUR LANE 4
KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI KAMRUP METRO PIN 781019
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVTOF ASSAM MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH DEPTT
DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
3:THE SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH DEPTT
DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
4:THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION ASSAM
GUWAHATI 781022
5:THE PRINCIPAL CUM CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
ASSAM MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL DIBRUGARH ASSAM PIN
786002
6:THE PRINCIPAL CUM CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
KOKRAJHAR MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL KOKRAJHAR ASSAM
PIN 78337
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J PATOWARY, MR. V A CHOWDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, HEALTH
Page No.# 2/5
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
06.08.2025
Heard Mr. A. Bora, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. J. Patowary,
learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Bora, learned Standing
Counsel, Health for the respondents.
The petitioner before this Court is a medical professional employed under
the State Health Department as a Professor & HoD of Paediatrics presently
posted at Kokrajhar Medical College & Hospital. Pursuant to a complaint lodged
against him under The Sexual Harassment of Women At Workplace (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 by one student the proceedings under the
Internal Complaints Committee (ICC in short) was initiated and the petitioner
was asked to appear before the Internal Complaints Committee.
During the pendency of the proceedings in order to ensure that proper
enquiry being conducted against the petitioner he was also transferred out and
posted at Silchar.
The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that although the
enquiry was initiated by the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) as constituted
under the law, the proceedings have not yet concluded or if concluded the
findings thereof, have not been intimated to the petitioner. However, the
petitioner was surprised to being served a charge sheet vide charge sheet dated
02.05.2024 calling upon the petitioner to reply to the charges levelled against
the petitioner and as to why the penalties prescribed under Rule 7 of the Assam
Page No.# 3/5
Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules 1964 should not be imposed. The petitioner
replied to the charges levelled against him and subsequently, the enquiry was
conducted against the petitioner purportedly on the same charges which are or
werebeing enquired into by Internal Complaints Committee on the basis of the
complaints lodged against the petitioner.
The enquiry report concluded that there is a substance of truth in the
allegations against the petitioner for having inflicted sexual harassment upon
the complainant and therefore, the charges of gross misconduct amounting to
moral turpitude and violation of Rule 3(1) of Assam Civil Services (Conduct)
Rules, 1965 have been established. Pursuant thereto the Disciplinary Authority
by order dated 24.07.2025 imposed a punishment on the petitioner by imposing
a penalty of reduction to a lower post i.e. Associate Professor under the
Provisions of Rule of 7(iv) of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules,
1964 on the petitioner.
The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the procedure
adopted by the respondents while resorting to the proceedings under Rule 7 of
the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 and imposition of the
penalty is totally contrary to the rules as well as to the judgment rendered in
Medha Kotwal Lele & Ors vs U.O.I. & Ors reported in 2013 1 SCC 297 and
Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa reported in 2024 1 SCC 632. Referring to
the said judgments rendered by the Apex Court the learned Senior Counsel for
the petitioner submits that the law has been already been laid down by the
Apex Court to the effect that pursuant to any complaint lodged under The
Sexual Harassment of Women At Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and
Redressal) Act, 2013, it is the Internal Complaints Committee who has to initiate
Page No.# 4/5
the enquiry upon giving proper notice to the petitioner or to the charged official
and upon such findings arrived at by the Committee holding the Delinquent
Officer to be the guilty of the charges of sexual harassment, the Disciplinary
Authority may proceed to impose further penalties under the Assam Services
(Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 on the basis of such findings arrived at by the
Internal Complaints Committee. This has been categorically held to be
procedure required to be followed by the authorities concerned in the judgment
rendered to.
The learned Senior Counsel therefore submits that this procedure required
to be followed has been given a complete go bye and has been totally ignored.
While the enquiry for the Internal Complaints Committee is still pending,
Disciplinary Authority has proceeded unilaterally to impose a punishment on the
petitioner by taking recourse to Rule 7 of the Assam Services (Discipline &
Appeal) Rules, 1964. He therefore submits that the entire procedure resorted to
by the Department and the punishment imposed is totally contrary to the
provisions of law as well as the judgment of the Apex Court and therefore, the
same needs to be interfered with, set aside and quashed.
Mr. D.P. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department on the other
hand submits that at this stage, he does not have any instructions with regard
to the status of the enquiry completed or conducted by the Internal Complaints
Committee. He therefore, seeks liberty to complete his instructions.
Considering the submissions made at the Bar and upon perusal of the
pleadings available in the writ petition and the judgments of the Apex Court
referred to. This Court is of the view that the matter will require hearing and
due consideration of the Court.
Page No.# 5/5
Mr. D.P. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department submits that
the instructions he can be produced within two days.
Taking into consideration the matter be listed again on 13.08.2025.
Till the next date fixed the impugned order dated 24.07.2025 to the extent
that the petitioner has been transferred and posted as Associate Professor,
Departmental of Paediatrics, Diphu Medical College & Hospital with immediate
effect shall remain stayed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant