- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 46831 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE A TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE CHARITABLE EENDOWMENTS ACT, 1890, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU 560 012 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR SRI RAJARAN, S/O VARADARAJAN, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS. 2. PROF. ANURAG KUMAR SON OF SRI AJAI UMAR SRIVASTAVA DIRECTOR, INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU 560 012. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S.R KAMALACHARAN .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DR. D. SANNA DURGAPPA SON OF SRI HANUMANTHAPPA D., AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT ARASIKERE POST, MARAPANAHALLI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 583 125. 2. KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 P.B. NO.5074, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 233 REPRESENTED BY ITS JOINT SECRETARY SRI MALLAPPA B. KALE. 3. KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SCHEDULED CASTES & SCHEDULED TRIBES WELFARE COMMITTEE LEGISLATIVE ASEMBLY SECRETARIAT, P.B. NO.5074, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 233 REPRESENTED BY JOINT SECRETARY KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R2 & R3; R1 - SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE/ORDER DATED 06.10.2017 OF R-2 [ANNEXURE-J] AND THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY R-3 PURSUANT TO THE APPLICATION DATED 13.03.2017 OF R-1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioners are before this Court seeking following reliefs: '' (a) quash the Notice/Order bearing No.Ka.ViSaSa/AJaAPamSa/69/Application/2017 dated 06.10.2017 of respondent No.2 (Annexure-U) and the proceedings initiated by respondent No.3 in No. Ka.ViSaSa/AJaAPamSa/69/Application/2017 pursuant to the Application dated 13.03.2017 of respondent No.1; (b) pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. '' 2. Brief facts of the case are; 2.1 That respondent No.1 was working as a lecturer under the petition No.1-Indian Institute of Science from the year 2008. On 25.09.2014, a complaint alleging sexual harassment against respondent No.1 was filed before the Internal Complaints Committee namely Sexual Harassment Complaint Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'SHCC'). 2.2 That the said SHCC submitted the report on 30.09.2014, recommending removal of respondent No.1 from his post. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 2.3 That the respondent No.1 had apparently thereafter submitted a representation on 10.10.2014, alleging harassment and atrocity by Senior Members of the faculties. 2.4 That on 13.10.2014, a committee was constituted to probe into the allegations of harassment made by respondent No.1. That on 15.10.2014, respondent No.1 had submitted reply denying the allegations of sexual harassment. Enquiry was conducted, witnesses were examined and documents were scrutinized between 18.10.2014 and 25.10.2014. A report dated 12.11.2014 was submitted by the said SHCC purportedly establishing the allegations of sexual harassment against the respondent No.1 and recommending the imposition of punishment in terms of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2013'). 2.5 That the respondent No.1 was furnished with a copy of the report on 16.03.2015 to which he had submitted his reply on 23.03.2015. 2.6 Council of the petitioner-Institute being the disciplinary authority proceeded to consider the report of SHCC - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 and reply of the respondent No.1 by Order dated 28.04.2015 accepted the report furnished by the SHCC and imposed the punishment on respondent No.1 of his removal from service. Being aggrieved, respondent No.1 filed writ petition in W.P.No.19594/2015. 2.7 Simultaneously, respondent No.1 also made a complaint on 12.05.2015 before the Additional Director General of Police, CRE Cell, complaining removal of his service. That respondent No.1 had filed an appeal, which was later converted into review petition and the same was rejected on 20.06.2015. 2.8 That respondent No.1 had also submitted a complaint before the Karnataka State SC/ST Commission alleging harassment by the petitioners and its senior faculty members and also against those who participated in the enquiry proceedings conducted by SHCC. Notice by the Karnataka State SC/ST Commission was issued to the petitioner upon the said complaint on 07.07.2015. Being aggrieved by the action initiated by the Karnataka State SC/ST Commission and the Additional Director General of Police, CRE Cell, petitioners filed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 a writ petition in W.P.No.41118-41120/2015 seeking quash of the said proceedings. 2.9 That respondent No.1 on 03.05.2016 had addressed letter to the Karnataka State SC/ST Commission, the Additional Director General of Police, CRE Cell and National Commission for SC/ST for withdrawing the complaints unconditionally. 2.10 That on 06.04.2016, a joint memo was filed by the parties in W.P.No.19594/2015 to which the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 was disposed of converting the removal from service to resignation. Thereafter, writ petition filed by the petitioners in W.P.No.41118-41120/2015 were also disposed of in the light of the memo filed by the respondent No.1 in the earlier writ petition. 2.11 That on 29.08.2016, respondent No.1 had made an application seeking recall of the order dated 06.04.2016 passed in W.P.No.19594/2015 passed on the basis of the joint memo and sought for restoration of the case for disposal on merits. 2.12 Respondent No.1 filed another false complaint before the Karnataka State SC/ST Commission, which was - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 registered in Case No.875/2016. The application filed by the respondent No.1 in W.P.No.19594/2015 seeking recall of the Order dated 06.04.2016 was dismissed on 21.09.2016. 2.13 That the respondent No.1 thereafter filed a private complaint on 23.11.2016 in P.C.R.No.55/2016 before the II Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and this constrained the petitioner to institute a proceedings in W.P.Nos.61800-61804/2016. Pursuant to which, further proceedings in the said P.C.R.No.55/2016 were stayed. 2.14 Respondent No.1 had filed another private complaint in P.C.R.No.9/2017, aggrieved by which, petitioner No.1 herein had preferred another writ petition in W.P.Nos.10835- 10840/2017, the said writ petition has been disposed of quashing the said private complaint in P.C.R.No.9/2017. 2.15 That the writ petition filed by the petitioners in W.P.No.61800-61804/2016 has been allowed. 2.16 Things stood thus, the respondent No.1 has filed an application before respondent No.3-Karnataka Legislative Assembly Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Welfare - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 Committee on 13.03.2017, pursuant to which respondent No.2 has issued a notice directing the petitioners to file a reply and appear before respondent No.3-Committee on 05.05.2017. 2.17 That the petitioners have submitted the reply. The petitioners were informed that the decision had already been taken by the respondent No.2, accepting the case of the respondent No.1, directing the petitioners to reinstate respondent No.1 as per Communication dated 06.10.2017 produced as per Annexure-U. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid turn of events at the hands of respondent Nos.2 and 3, the petitioners are before this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners referring to the joint memo dated 06.04.2016 and the consequent order dated 06.04.2016 passed in W.P.No.19594/2015 submits that once the matter was set at rest on mutually agreed terms between the respondent No.1 and the petitioner No.1, in furtherance thereof, respondent No.1 having opted to submit his resignation, which was indeed submitted and accepted, nothing survived for the respondent No.1 to be aggrieved of. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 4. He further submits despite feeble attempt made by the respondent No.1 challenging the very terms of the joint memo which resulted in dismissal, the respondent No.1 had opted modes of re-initiating the proceedings by making complaint to several authorities. He submits that all the attempts of the respondent No.1 of re-agitating the issue once settled before the authorities having attained finality, and the same were brought to the notice of respondent Nos.2 and 3. That without even adverting to the reply submitted by the petitioner No.1, the respondent No.2 proceeded to pass the impugned communication directing the petitioner No.1 to reinstate the respondent No.1. He submits that there is no allegations or demands made by the respondent No.1 with regard to he not having been paid any terminal benefits or his entitlement on resignation of his services. The only allegation being that he being innocent of the sexual harassment, which matter has attained finality and same could not be re-opened by the respondent No.2-Assembly. 5. Learned AGA though submits that there is a committee called ''Petitions Committee'', coming under the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 aegis of the respondent No.2-Karnataka Legislative Assembly, to which a general member of a public can have access and it would be considered. He further submits that this appears to be one such case, wherein the case of respondent No.1 has been favoured. Hence he submits that there is no illegality committed by the respondent No.2. 6. Heard and perused the records. 7. This Court is not apprised of any piece of legislation or provisions of law empowering ''legislative committee'' to sit over a matter which has already attained finality in terms of an order passed by a competent Court Of Law, namely this Court. 8. The facts narrated above indicate that proceedings against the respondent No.1 were initiated upon the allegation of sexual harassment resulting in constitution of a committee as contemplated under the Act, 2013. The said committee has apparently adhered to the procedure contemplated under the said Act, 2013 and has submitted the report finding respondent No.1 guilty of the allegations, which further resulted in his dismissal from service, which he has apparently challenged in the writ petition in W.P.No.19594/2015. When the matter was - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 seized, the respondent No.1 has also gone on filing complaints before the Additional Director General of Police, CRE Cell and Karnataka State SC/ST Commission etc., 9. Initiation of such parallel proceedings had constrained the petitioner No.1 to approach this Court by filing writ petition in W.P.Nos.61800-61804/2016. That apart, the respondent No.1 has also filed private complaints before the Jurisdictional Session Court alleging harassment and humiliation, which are also subject matter of the writ petition in W.P.Nos.63878- 63882/2016. 10. The writ petition in W.P.No.19594/2015, filed by respondent No.1, has culminated in an order dated 06.04.2016, pursuant to a joint memo that was filed produced at Annexure-G. 11. Perusal of the said joint memo and the order dated 06.04.2016 indicate that the respondent No.1 herein had settled the matter by accepting his termination from service as the one upon his resignation and he had also received all terminal benefits as per the rules, based on which the respondent No.1 had resigned from the service. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 12. Writ petitions in W.P.Nos.61800-61804/2016 and 63878-63882/2016 have been allowed. The issue has thus reached finality. 13. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, his grievance does not appears to be non-payment of his terminal benefits, but re-agitating his case of he being innocent of the allegations of sexual harassment. 14. This is emanating from the notice issued by the respondent No.2-Assembly produced at Annexure-U. Wherein the respondent No. 2-Assembly has observed that there appears to be no prima-facie case of sexual harassment against the respondent No.1. It is also observed that terms of the joint memo were not complied with. 15. A detailed reply dated 02.05.2017 has been submitted by the petitioner No.1 as seen at Annexures-Q. However, by a communication dated 06.10.2017, respondent No.2 has directed the petitioner No.1 to forthwith reinstate respondent No.1 to his position as the Professor. There is no reference to any order having been passed. No reference to provision of law or the piece of legislation under which the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30679 WP No. 46831 of 2017 respondent No.2-Assembly is vested with the power and authority to issue such a communication. 16. As already noted above, no provisions of law is brought to the notice of this Court, empowering and vesting such power and jurisdiction with respondent No.2 to undo all that has taken place under due process of law, noted above. 17. It appears to be case of overreaching of the authority, having no source of power, traceable to any competent legislature. 18. Order impugned clearly is arbitrary, suffering from lack of jurisdiction requires to be set aside. Accordingly, following: ORDER (i) Petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 06.10.2017 as per Annexure-U is quashed. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25