New Delhi: When Dr K. Srinivasa Rao, the secretary of Sahitya Akademi, allegedly sexually harassed a female colleague in 2018 and the woman lodged a complaint with the Local Complaints Committee (LCC), the Akademi responded by dismissing her from service, citing her "poor performance".

Recently, the Delhi high court has said the Akademi's action was not only unjust and unlawful, but also an act of retaliation. In a ruling issued on August 28, 2025, the Delhi high court entirely dismissed the claims made by both the Akademi and the secretary, reinstating the woman to her original position.

While the court directed the removal of the names of the Akademi and the secretary from the order (thus maintaining their confidentiality), it did not impose any restrictions on reporting about them.

The Sahitya Akademi had opposed the investigation into the matter, questioning the jurisdiction of the LCC. The Akademi preferred that the matter be addressed by its Internal Complaints Committee (ICC). However, the high court clarified that the authority to conduct this investigation lies with the LCC, not the ICC.

The LCC is established under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act). This committee is responsible for addressing complaints of workplace sexual harassment in situations where the ICC is absent or when the accused is the "employer", indicating that they had a significant role in the complainant's hiring.

The woman alleged that Akademi president Dr Madhav Kaushik and members of the ICC pressured her to withdraw her complaint. During an ICC meeting, she was even informed that no action would be taken against the secretary. As a result, the woman continued to experience mental distress and anguish.

It is astonishing that while the victim is battling against this senior official involved in such a grave matter, the government is honouring its own official. He is being afforded the opportunity to meet with high-ranking politicians and is being sent to global events as India's representative.

Srinivasa Rao was appointed secretary of the Sahitya Akademi in 2013.

The job and the beginning of harassment

Jugnu (name changed), hailing from Northeast India, was appointed to a senior position in the Sahitya Akademi in February 2018. According to Jugnu's complaint, as noted in the high court order, the secretary began to subject her to sexual harassment from the very outset of this professional journey.

She alleged that this harassment manifested in various ways – unwanted physical and sexual contact, lewd remarks and even sexual assault.

She asserted that she was threatened with dire consequences if she resisted the demands for physical contact. The victim also alleged that she faced discrimination based on her regional identity.

As previously reported by The Wire, the first instance of sexual harassment allegedly took place between September 4 and September 6, 2018, when Jugnu accompanied the secretary on a work trip to Leh. At the time, Jugnu had recently got married. The complaint stated that Rao remarked that she had grown "bigger" since her marriage and, while gesturing towards her breasts, he stated, "There has been pumping and shumping."

During a visit to Assam on September 14-15, 2018, the secretary placed a sizeable painting (a gift he had received) in front of Jugnoo, who was seated in the back of the car, and allegedly remarked that if the painting were slightly taller, he "could do much more work with her".

On November 14, 2018, while in Gangtok, the secretary placed his hand on her shoulder. When the woman protested loudly, the secretary responded, "Women from the Northeast are seen as 'cool'."

At the Sadri Bhasha Sammelan in Ranchi from September 13 to 15, 2019, the secretary attempted to insert his finger into her mouth in the Press Club elevator.

Ultimately, on November 7, 2019, the woman sent an email to the president of the organisation, bringing the issue to his attention and requesting for an external, independent committee to be established. However, the president opted for the ICC to conduct an investigation.

Jugnu did not submit a complaint to the ICC. However, she asserted that "the president interpreted my email as a complaint and sent it to the ICC without my approval".

On November 9, 2019, the woman wrote a letter to the deputy secretary, voicing her concerns, which were subsequently forwarded to the Executive Committee. On December 9, 2019, she wrote to the ICC, stating that during the meeting on December 5, 2019, the chairperson exerted pressure on her to retract the complaint and made it clear that no action would be taken against the secretary.

Finally, on November 29, 2019, Jugnoo lodged a formal complaint of harassment with the district magistrate's liaison officer (LCC) of the New Delhi district. This body was established under the POSH Act, 2013.

In orders dated December 16, 2019 and January 16, 2020, the LCC stated that the matter was eligible for a preliminary hearing and concluded that the role of 'secretary' was encompassed within the definition of 'employer' as outlined in Section 2(g) of the POSH Act. Consequently, the committee recommended granting Jugnoo three months' leave with pay as interim relief.

How did the case reach court?

According to Jugnu, after the Akademi refused to accept the LCC's recommendations, she approached the Delhi high court. Meanwhile, the Akademi initiated a separate writ petition contesting the jurisdiction of the LCC. The Akademi argued that the secretary was not the "employer".

Through interim orders issued on January 29, 2020 and March 5, 2021, the high court stayed the LCC's ongoing investigation due to uncertainty regarding whether the accused qualified as the "employer". The LCC is only authorised to probe a case against an employer.

However, during this period, the court directed the Akademi multiple times to disburse the petitioner's salary and to treat her as being on leave with pay, ensuring that she would not lose her means of livelihood and financial stability until a conclusive ruling was given. However, instead of adhering to the court's decision, the Akademi opted to terminate Jugnu's employment.

On February 13, 2020, the high court directed that the woman be granted paid leave. The following day, February 14, 2020, the Akademi released an office memorandum that terminated Jugnoo's employment and ceased her salary, effective May 8, 2020.

The high court's judgment and Supreme Court's entry

On October 25, 2021, the Delhi high court quashed the office memorandum that had terminated Jugnu's employment.

The Akademi and its secretary subsequently lodged an appeal against this ruling. On November 12, 2021, a division bench of the Delhi high court stayed the implementation of the earlier ruling. This action effectively hindered Jugnu’s access to court remedies, including reinstatement and salary disbursements.

Therefore, Jugnu turned to the Supreme Court. In its ruling dated April 12, 2022, the Supreme Court mandated that the woman receive her salary from April 1, 2022, until a conclusive decision regarding the appeal is made.

The high court was now required to consider three points:

1. Is the LCC empowered to investigate allegations of sexual harassment levelled by the petitioner against the Akademi secretary?

2. Should the office memorandum terminating the woman's services be revoked?

3. Based on these two questions, what relief should the woman be granted?

The court's analysis

Point one

The secretary maintained that he was appointed by the Executive Board in accordance with Section 8 of the Akademi's Constitution and worked under the president. Therefore, he argued that he could not be classified as an 'employer' as defined in Section 2(g) of the POSH Act.

However, the court held that Section 8(I) of the Akademi's Constitution explicitly identifies the secretary as its "principal executive officer". According to Section 8(III)(f), the secretary possesses the power to enter into contracts on behalf of the Akademi. The Parliamentary Standing Committee also acknowledged the secretary as the primary executive and administrative leader of the Akademi. The arguments presented by the Akademi too characterised the secretary as the administrative in-charge of the institution.

Thus, the secretary can justifiably be regarded as the "employer".

Therefore, the LCC had the right to investigate the secretary.

Point two

The woman contested the termination of her service while these proceedings were pending. The Akademi argued that she was on probation for a duration of two years, which concluded on February 14, 2020. Given that her appointment was contractual, the Akademi contended that the termination of a probationary employee's service cannot be contested via a writ petition.

The court stated that terminations based on malicious or extraneous/irrelevant reasons are subject to challenge. The timing of the petitioner's termination, coinciding with a sexual harassment complaint against the secretary, suggests a vindictive motive. The Executive Board ought to have postponed any actions until the resolution of the complaint.

Furthermore, the court remarked that the manner in which the petitioner's services were terminated raises concerns. The termination was predicated on the recommendations of a so-called "Review Committee", which is not mentioned in the Akademi's Constitution or service bylaws.

Therefore, it is evident that the petitioner's termination was a retaliatory measure aimed at suppressing the sexual harassment complaint and shielding the secretary from scrutiny.

Point three

The court concluded its order by stating that the secretary is deemed an "employer" as defined under Section 2(g) of the POSH Act. As a result, any complaint of sexual harassment against the secretary must be submitted to the LCC, as the ICC lacks the jurisdiction to address or investigate such complaints. Additionally, the termination of the petitioner's employment has been deemed unlawful and motivated by malicious intent. The Office Memorandum dated February 14, 2020, which terminated the petitioner's employment, was annulled.

Concerning the Sahitya Akademi's stance, the court remarked, "The ongoing controversy could have been averted had the Akademi, as a leading cultural institution, acted with the transparency and accountability mandated by law. …Rather than perceiving the LCC's involvement as intrusive, the Akademi could have viewed this as a chance to promote transparency and rebuild trust with its employees and the public."

The court directed the Akademi to promptly disburse the petitioner's salary for the current month and to settle any outstanding salary arrears within four weeks.

The high court added that the petitioner should be regarded as on leave with pay until the LCC issues a suitable interim order ensuring a secure working environment.

The court instructed the LCC to promptly address the petitioner's grievance in line with the provisions of the POSH Act.

Akademi and secretary's response to the ruling

The Wire reached out to the Akademi and the secretary to seek their views on the court's ruling. Akademi president Dr Madhav Kaushik did not reply to the emailed inquiries.

"The matter is currently pending in the Delhi high court, and the competent court has yet to decide on the allegations levelled. Since the case is still pending in court, it would be inappropriate to comment on it, and doing so could also be considered contempt of court," the secretary told The Wire.

Government honours for secretary continue

On August 23, 2025, merely five days prior to the Delhi high court ruling, the Official Language Department of the Bihar government awarded the secretary the Babu Ganga Sharan Singh Award for his "exceptional contributions to the Hindi language and literature" during the 'Hindi Seva Samman Aur Puraskar' ceremony, which took place at the Chief Minister's Secretariat in Patna. Chief minister Nitish Kumar personally presented him with a certificate of honour along with a cheque amounting to Rs 1 lakh.

In March of this year, President Draupadi Murmu inaugurated the second edition of the 'Vividhata Ka Amrit Mahotsav' at Rashtrapati Bhavan. During this event, the secretary was tasked with welcoming the president at the Akademi's book stall.

Rao has also hosted Prime Minister Narendra Modi on several occasions.

In 2024, the BRICS Literature Forum took place in Kazan, Russia where esteemed writers, poets, philosophers, artists and scholars from BRICS nations were in attendance. The representation from India at this forum included the Akademi’s president and secretary.

It is important to note that these events transpired after the initial ruling of the LCC, a government-appointed body, which determined that the sexual harassment allegations against the secretary were subject to trial and recommended that the Akademi take notice of the woman’s complaint. Additionally, the Delhi high court had issued a temporary order in support of the complainant.

Translated from the Hindi original by Naushin Rehman.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.