Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010200892024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3061/2024 INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND ANR (IIT), GUWAHATI, AMINGAON, NORTH GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (R), GHY-39 TO BE REP. BY THE DIRECTOR 2: THE REGISTRAR (IN-CHARGE) INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (IIT) GUWAHATI AMINGAON NORTH GUWAHATI KAMRUP (R) GHY-39 ASSAM VERSUS ALOKE KUMAR GHOSHAL S/O- SRI JAGABANDHU GHOSHAL, R/O- QUARTER NO. F-26, IIT GUWAHATI CAMPUS, IIT GUWAHATI, AMINGAON, NORTH GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (R), GHY-39, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : SC, IIT, MR. R P KAKOTI SR. ADV. Advocate for the Respondent : MR B GOGOI, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Page No.# 2/3 12.03.2025 Heard Mr. R. P. Kakoti, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. B. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the applicants. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner/OP. By filing this I.A. a prayer has been made to vacate the interim order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.5959/2022 restraining the respondents from proceeding further with the Internal Committee proceedings drawn against the writ petitioner on the allegation of sexual harassment. Mr. Kakoti, learned senior counsel for the applicant has argued that the three earlier Internal Committees have wrongly closed the proceeding on an erroneous understanding and appreciation of facts as well as law. Since the allegation is of sexual harassment is of serious nature and the authorities of the IIT, Guwahati have a statutory duty to have a proper enquiry conducted on such allegation, the interim order dated 19.09.2022 be vacated and the Internal Committee constituted for the 4th time be permitted to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. The said prayer has, however, been stoutly resisted by Mr. Gogoi, learned counsel for the writ petitioner by submitting that his client cannot be repeatedly subjected to enquiry by the Internal Committee without any valid reason. According to Mr. Gogoi, once the Internal Committee has decided not to proceed with the matter, the question of subjecting the petitioner again and again to the proceedings of Internal Committee enquiry would not arise in the eyes of law. After hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both the sides, this Page No.# 3/3 Court is of the opinion that a serious question of law, as to whether, the writ petitioner could be subjected to repeated proceeding under the Internal Committee, in the light of the arguments and counter-arguments made by the parties, would arise for decision in the writ petition. Unless a finding is recorded by the Court on the above legal issue, it may not be permissible for the Internal Committee to proceed further in the matter. As such, the prayer made in the I.A. stands declined. The interim order passed earlier in the writ petition to continue. However, considering the submission of Mr. Kakoti, learned senior counsel for the applicant that there is some urgency in the matter, the writ petition be posted for expeditious hearing. I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant